Unexpectedly?
For President, Newt Gingrich
This newspaper endorses Newt Gingrich in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary.
America is at a crucial crossroads. It is not going to be enough to merely replace Barack Obama next year. We are in critical need of the innovative, forward-looking strategy and positive leadership that Gingrich has shown he is capable of providing. . . .
It’s all over the top of Memeorandum:
Union Leader endorses Newt Gingrich
— Politico
Gingrich wins Union Leader endorsement
— The Hill
Newt Gingrich Gets Big
New Hampshire Endorsement
— Fox News
Will this endorsement help Gingrich raise lots of money? Yep. Will it prevent Mitt Romney from winning New Hampshire? Nope.
“Behold . . . a little cloud . . . like a man’s hand,” on the horizon:
After Tuesday’s debate sponsored by the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute, The American Spectator‘s George Neumayr criticized Gingrich for his “scolding tone” on immigration, saying that Gingrich had “alienated conservatives … with his holier-than-thou approach to illegal immigration.” Tim Albrecht, spokesman for Iowa’s Republican Gov. Terry Brandstad, said on Twitter after the debate: “Newt did himself significant harm tonight on immigration among caucus and primary voters.”
Roy Beck of Numbers USA, a group that advocates for lower immigration levels, said voters won’t like Gingrich’s “long-term record” on immigration.
“In fact, Gingrich’s leadership in Congress is one of the reasons we have so many illegal aliens today who have been able to stay in this country for 25 years,” Beck said in an online column Wednesday. “That’s the supreme irony of Gingrich’s pro-amnesty remarks in last night’s debate. The man who helped ensure that illegal aliens from the 1980s and 1990s are still here in 2011 asked voters last night to consider the inhumanity of making illegal aliens leave this country after they have sunk such long roots here.”
Beck noted that Gingrich had a career grade of “D” on Numbers USA’s report card on immigration issues.
Just sayin’ . . . a couple more headlines:
Did Newt Gingrich just
flip-flop on immigration?
— Christian Science Monitor
Rivals say Gingrich stance
is equivalent to amnesty
— Des Moines Register
Newt Gingrich will be a big test for the Tea Party/Conservative movement.
Newt is the first major politician who was against the Tea Party/Conservative movement and is now trying to co-opt it as it has become politically expedient.
Will Tea Party folks look into Gingrich’s record or will they believe his sweet lies?
[…] Cain supporter Robert Stacy McCain: “Will this endorsement help Gingrich raise lots of money? Yep. Will it prevent Mitt Romney […]
I guess we’ll see.
I’ve already predicted that Gingrich’s immigration statement will help him in the Iowa caucus.
My hypothesis: Iowa’s farmers and business owners are more likely than “man on the street” to drag themselves out to the caucus.
Those farmers and business owners know that Iowa’s 70,000 “illegal immigrants” constitute an important component of their own viability and profitability.
Those farmers and business owners would also probably rather not be conscripted as unpaid ICE agents, on pain of fine, business closure or even imprisonment, through “E-Verify” and other communist schemes.
They may not be willing to take to the streets screaming “si se puedo” and waving “AMNESTY NOW” signs, but they’re probably willing to go out and vote for, rather than against, their own interests.
The Union Leader endorsed McCain. How’d that work out for the country?
I could go along with something similar to Newt’s immigration idea, with the proviso that demonstrably credible border security must come first.
It’s Newt himself I have the problem with. He will screw conservatives over with the sadistic zeal John McCain would evince, but with McCain you could almost always predict the issues where he would screw us. Newt prefers the knife in the back to be a surprise.
How does requiring people to obey the law = “conscription”? In that sense, we’re all “conscripts”, which is simply farcical.
Richard,
“E-Verify” and other commie employee ID schemes don’t require people to obey the law, they require people to enforce the law.
Setting aside, of course, the fact that there are no valid federal immigration laws to either obey or enforce, since every last one of them is void due to blatant unconstitutionality.
Answer to your question: Probably not.
He had a chance, but his nuanced stance on immigration will probably prevent it. Too bad. I am all for real immigration reform, which starts with fining businesses that hire illegals. Give the fines to local government and just watch enforcement pick up. End the jobs and you end the problem. Then for those who have been living here 20 years +, we can work out a solution.
We can work out a deal where Mexicans and Central Americans can come and work at farm labor without being illegals. All it takes is recognizing guest workers.
I don’t so much question Newt’s positions on the issues as I question his judgment. He makes bad choices.
At this point, I’m now Anybody but Newt. My gosh, if my fellow Republicans nominate that pudge-faced knucklehead, I’ve voting for Gary Johnson on the Libertarian ticket.
Herman Cain-a-tors, Bachmanites, maybe it’s time we all rally around Mitt to head off Gingrich?
I question his image. He is clearly the ugliest most pale-faced candidate on that stage. Is this the image we want to present our fellow Americans of the Republican Party USA?
Michele Bachmann is hot. Mitt is super good looking. Herman, well, he’s a black guy. (But you already knew that.) Huntsman’s got some charm. Even Santorum is looking more suave these days.
Gingrich and Paul???? Both crinkly dudes, Gingrich with the added disaster of being grossly overweight.
I don’t think that will be necessary.
I don’t think Mitt or Gingrich can or will win (same goes for Paul, Huntsman, and Johnson).
I heard Dick Morris mention the other day that early on it will likely be a 3 way race between Mitt, Newt, and Cain (or another Tea Party candidate). I think this is fairly close to what we will see….though it appears (at least in the Conservative media) that Newt is tanking fast.
Pleased to see you got that Chief Justice gig. E-verify is no more “enforcing” the law than employee tax witholding is “enforcing the law”. Or FICA withholdings.
[…] related news, Michele Bachmann reminds us of Gingrich’s past push for amnesty for illegals. She’s not the only one.google_ad_client = "ca-pub-1395656889568144"; /* 300×250, created 8/11/08 */ google_ad_slot = […]
BTW, the UL doesn’t seem to like it when you remind people of that. They *poof*ed my comment.
I suppose you prefer the looks of Ron Paul’s fake eyebrows melting on face to the outward appearance of the other candidates?
Not this guy. Gingrich is as unacceptable to me as ORomney and for the same reason: he’s been all over the map and can’t be trusted.
Like I said, richard, nappy doesn’t actually believe he’s a citizen of the US. Neither do I.
Eeek!
Take heart in that the MUL no longer has the sway it once did. When the old man died, things went to hell.
Besides the fact that Newt has screwed over conservatives as Speaker and “post-Speaker” to numerous to even count, nominating him would play into the “white, old, rich” stereotype the media loves to paint Republicans with.
(Btw, Santorum is handsome in a retro, almost Mad Men way.)
Why cut any slack simply because they have been here 20+ years? They’re still criminals and should not be rewarded in any way.