Newt Gingrich speech at Ronald Reagan Dinner

[sybilll]

http://www.therightscoop.com/newt-gingrich-speech-at-ronald-reagan-dinner/

Newt may deserve a second look, baggage and all, after his dynamic performances in the debates, and this powerful speech today.  Say what you will about his faults, but his number one goal is to get Obama OUT of the White House.  I give that 2 UpTwinkles ~snark

[Mr Mannn]

Newt's a speaker, almost on the level of Reagan. I like Cain better, but I would love to see either of them debate Obama.

[Eupher]

I took a look at Newt's web site and thought I'd post his 21st Century Contract With America:

Executive Summary
    Repeal Obamacare and pass a replacement that saves lives and money by empowering patients and doctors, not bureaucrats and politicians.

    Return to robust job creation with a bold set of tax cuts and regulatory reforms that will free American entrepreneurs to invest and hire, as well as by reforming the Federal Reserve and creating a training requirement for extended federal unemployment benefits to encourage work and improve the quality of our workforce.

    Unleash America’s full energy production potential in oil, natural gas, coal, biofuels, wind, nuclear oil shale and more, creating jobs,  stimulating a sustainable manufacturing boom, lowering gasoline and other energy prices, increasing government revenues, and bolstering national security.

    Save Medicare and Social Security by giving Americans more choices and tools to live longer, healthier lives with greater financial independence.

    Balance the federal budget by freeing job-creators to grow the economy, reforming entitlements, and implementing waste cutting and productivity improvement systems such as Lean Six Sigma to eliminate waste and fraud. Pass a balanced budget amendment to keep it balanced.

    Control the border by January 1, 2014 and establish English as the official language of government; reform the legal visa system, and make it much easier to deport criminals and gang members while making it easier for law abiding visitors to come to the US.

    Revitalize our national security system to meet 21st century threats by restructuring and adequately funding our security agencies to function within a grand strategy for victory over those who seek to kill us or limit American power.

    Maximize the speed and impact of medical breakthroughs by removing unnecessary obstacles that block new treatments from reaching patients and emphasizing research spending towards urgent national priorities, like brain science with its impact on Alzheimer’s, autism, Parkinson's, mental health and other conditions knowledge of the brain will help solve.

    Restore the proper role of the judicial branch by using the clearly delineated powers available to the president and Congress to correct, limit, or replace judges who violate the Constitution.

    Enforce the Tenth Amendment by starting an orderly transfer of power and responsibility from the federal government back “to the states, respectively, or to the people,” as the Constitution requires. Over the next year, state and local officials and citizens will be asked to identify the areas which can be transferred back home.   

http://www.newt.org/contract/legislative-proposals

My impressions:

The above is very politically astute. It addresses most of the conservative issues that confront us, save perhaps the RKBA.

His tax reform plan:
1.  15% flat tax as an option (WTF is it with these guys and their "options?" Do they or do they not have the courage of their convictions????). But it does include deductions for charity, mortgage interest, and, of course, EIC  ). Also features a $12K standard deduction and $1K tax credit for every kid under 16.
2.  12.5% corporate tax rate - puts it less than Canada's which is at 16.5%.
3.  Elimination of the death tax, the capital gains tax, and puts in 100% expensing of capital outlays. No more bullshit depreciation schedules.


His promise to repeal/end:
1.  Obamacare, and he explains very clearly why this legislation is so destructive and destabilizing.
2.  Dodd-Frank.
3.  Sarbanes-Oxley.
4.  National Labor Relations Board

He plans to enact:
1.  English as the official language of government - YES. IT'S ABOUT FRIGGIN' TIME.
2.  Plans to control the border, though he doesn't say how other than to say moving half of the Homeland Security border agents to Southwestern states.

He has lots of rhetoric about an outdated military and a national security apparatus. Sounds good, but there's little substance there.

On the whole, he's got some good ideas and bears watching.

[Splashdown]

Newt is becoming my second choice. He's the smartest guy on the stage.

[Lacarnut]

Newt would be a much better choice than Romney.

[sybilll]

I think the very least Newt could do sans getting the nomination is to spend copious amounts of time coaching whoever the nominee is on how to debate (and kick ass). 

[TVDOC]

Newt is becoming my second choice. He's the smartest guy on the stage.

Newt has always been my first choice.......not only is he the smartest candidate, but even with all of his baggage, he is the most experienced in the group (in areas that count).

doc

[Eupher]

Newt has always been my first choice.......not only is he the smartest candidate, but even with all of his baggage, he is the most experienced in the group (in areas that count).

doc

Of course you know, doc, that the business of congressional, "national-level" experience is a two-edged sword. Washington "experience" often equates to "same-ol', same-ol" - business as usual which yields an inept, partisan Congress that can't get anything done.

I dare say that's what we have now, and I'm just not sure, despite Gingrich's assertions, that it's the same type of Congress that he dealt with as Speaker 15 - 17 years ago.

It's a much more divided Congress, with much more bitter political infighting. Perhaps that's characteristic of a Republican House and a Dem Senate, but I'm not so sure. How would a President Gingrich deal with the fact that the country hasn't had a freakin' BUDGET for the past what, two years?

In the past couple of Congresses, it's been gridlock and bullshit "Super Committees" doing what each house is supposed to do collectively. Is this the result of "national level experience?"

I'd dearly love to toss all the bastards out -- every damned one of them -- and start all over. 

[TVDOC]

Of course you know, doc, that the business of congressional, "national-level" experience is a two-edged sword. Washington "experience" often equates to "same-ol', same-ol" - business as usual which yields an inept, partisan Congress that can't get anything done.

I dare say that's what we have now, and I'm just not sure, despite Gingrich's assertions, that it's the same type of Congress that he dealt with as Speaker 15 - 17 years ago.

It's a much more divided Congress, with much more bitter political infighting. Perhaps that's characteristic of a Republican House and a Dem Senate, but I'm not so sure. How would a President Gingrich deal with the fact that the country hasn't had a freakin' BUDGET for the past what, two years?

In the past couple of Congresses, it's been gridlock and bullshit "Super Committees" doing what each house is supposed to do collectively. Is this the result of "national level experience?"

I'd dearly love to toss all the bastards out -- every damned one of them -- and start all over. 

All of what you say is true......however, I believe that Gingrich is a "Statesman" in the essential sense, and I see that as what we need in the WH at this point in our history.

The lack of a budget can be placed entirely at the feet of the Democrats, who, being in control of the HoR beginning in 2007, intentionally failed to submit a budget in order to avoid "going on record" as to their massive spending intentions.......they knew they could get away with a ongoing series of continuing resolutions, as nobody was paying any attention to them.

Whoever is elected to the WH next November will be dealing with an entirely new congressional situation, which is not as yet known.  Were I a betting man, I'd put my money on the R's picking up a few more seats in the HoR, and critically gaining control of the Senate again, which is key.  The Dems have far too many senate seats to defend in this political environment to keep their majority there.......I don't see any way that it can happen.  That said, I consider Mitch McConnell a limp-wristed wimp as a majority leader, but even so, he is leagues ahead of Reed.

"Not getting anything done" can sometimes be a GOOD thing, as in last year's election we succeeded in stopping the liberal agenda in its tracks.......which, since the WH wasn't in play, was the best we could hope for at the time.  I just laugh when I hear pundits, pollsters, and politicians whine about a "do nothing congress" right now, as that is EXACTLY what we sent them there to do.......stop the Dems........we are often too quick to criticize without considering what is really possible until Democrats are completely relegated to minority status.

I've read most of Newt's writings, and I firmly believe that he has a firm grip on economics, history, foreign policy, and the military that the other candidates simply don't possess, plus he certainly has a track record as an aggressive leader, and "leadership" is what the country needs sorely now, and I see him as really the only Republican that demonstrates all of those attributes, plus enough political experience to navigate inside the beltway.  He also has the charisma and speaking skills to be electable.......which unfortunately many of the balance of the field lack

I'll agree that he has committed a few blunders over the years, however, most of what we've criticized him for here was backing candidates that were too "moderate" for us in a number of elections.....and you know what?  In the great majority of cases he was right.....our chosen candidate lost.......he understands that having a RINO in an office from a blue state is far superior in the grand scheme of things than having a Dem in that same seat.  At least the RINO is sitting in "your" caucus, and you have some semblance of control.

It certainly doesn't hurt that he isn't shy about telling the media to "shove it", when necessary........

doc

[Lacarnut]

All of what you say is true......however, I believe that Gingrich is a "Statesman" in the essential sense, and I see that as what we need in the WH at this point in our history.

The lack of a budget can be placed entirely at the feet of the Democrats, who, being in control of the HoR beginning in 2007, intentionally failed to submit a budget in order to avoid "going on record" as to their massive spending intentions.......they knew they could get away with a ongoing series of continuing resolutions, as nobody was paying any attention to them.

Whoever is elected to the WH next November will be dealing with an entirely new congressional situation, which is not as yet known.  Were I a betting man, I'd put my money on the R's picking up a few more seats in the HoR, and critically gaining control of the Senate again, which is key.  The Dems have far too many senate seats to defend in this political environment to keep their majority there.......I don't see any way that it can happen.  That said, I consider Mitch McConnell a limp-wristed wimp as a majority leader, but even so, he is leagues ahead of Reed.

"Not getting anything done" can sometimes be a GOOD thing, as in last year's election we succeeded in stopping the liberal agenda in its tracks.......which, since the WH wasn't in play, was the best we could hope for at the time.  I just laugh when I hear pundits, pollsters, and politicians whine about a "do nothing congress" right now, as that is EXACTLY what we sent them there to do.......stop the Dems........we are often too quick to criticize without considering what is really possible until Democrats are completely relegated to minority status.

I've read most of Newt's writings, and I firmly believe that he has a firm grip on economics, history, foreign policy, and the military that the other candidates simply don't possess, plus he certainly has a track record as an aggressive leader, and "leadership" is what the country needs sorely now, and I see him as really the only Republican that demonstrates all of those attributes, plus enough political experience to navigate inside the beltway.  He also has the charisma and speaking skills to be electable.......which unfortunately many of the balance of the field lack

I'll agree that he has committed a few blunders over the years, however, most of what we've criticized him for here was backing candidates that were too "moderate" for us in a number of elections.....and you know what?  In the great majority of cases he was right.....our chosen candidate lost.......he understands that having a RINO in an office from a blue state is far superior in the grand scheme of things than having a Dem in that same seat.  At least the RINO is sitting in "your" caucus, and you have some semblance of control.

It certainly doesn't hurt that he isn't shy about telling the media to "shove it", when necessary........

doc

Excellent post