Yikes! Newt Gingrich making sense!?!?
These are frightening words to type, but … Newt Gingrich and I agree with each other.
Talking to Greta van Susteren last night on Fox, the former speaker noted that Dede Scozzafava, the Republican candidate in New York’s 23rd congressional district, had been chosen by county party leaders in that district to be the GOP’s nominee in next week’s special election.
Yet Republicans from outside that district are trying to overrule that choice as ideologically unsuitable and impose their own candidate on the district.
Here’s an outtake of the discussion:
Gingrich: Well, I just find it fascinating that my many friends who claim to be against Washington having too much power, they claim to be in favor of the 10th Amendment giving states back their rights, they claim to favor local control and local authority, now they suddenly get local control and local authority in upstate New York, they don’t like the outcome.
There were four Republican meetings. In all four meetings, state Representative Dede Scozzafava came in first. In all four meetings, Mr. Hoffman, the independent, came in either last or certainly not in the top three. He doesn’t live in the district. Dede Scozzafava…
VAN SUSTEREN: He doesn’t live in the district?
GINGRICH: No, he lives outside of the district. Dede Scozzafava is endorsed by the National Rifle Association for her 2nd Amendment position, has signed the no-tax-increase pledge, voted against the Democratic governor’s big-spending budget, is against the cap-and-trade tax increase on energy, is against the Obama health plan, and will vote for John Boehner, rather than Nancy Pelosi, to be speaker.
Now, that’s adequately conservative in an upstate New York district. And on other issues, she’s about where the former Republican, McHugh, was. So I say to my many conservative friends who suddenly decided that whether they’re from Minnesota or Alaska or Texas, they know more than the upstate New York Republicans? I don’t think so. And I don’t think it’s a good precedent. And I think if this third-party candidate takes away just enough votes to elect the Democrat, then we will have strengthened Nancy Pelosi by the divisiveness. We will not have strengthened the conservative movement.
Gingrich goes on to conclude that if “we’re going to purge the party of anybody who doesn’t agree with us 100 percent — that guarantees Obama’s reelection. That guarantees Pelosi is speaker for life. I mean, I think that is a very destructive model for the Republican Party.”
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Newt Gingrich, the voice of reason in the GOP.
That too is a scary thing to type.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
309 comments Add your comment
Taxpayer
October 29th, 2009
8:37 am
Paul,
You would be the lame one to claim that I try to divert attention by stating fact regarding the Republicans true intentions with Medicare or the fact that Republicans are indeed the war mongers. “Bomb, bomb, bomb, Anyone” might as well have been McCain and Palin’s battle cry.
Not the cuts Democrats propose, mind you, but cuts resulting solely in areas that would benefit their industries.
Now, how about providing some proof to verify your claim on this one first. Then we can proceed to some of your other lameness.
Repukes and DummyCrats are ALL Scum
October 29th, 2009
8:45 am
Forgit the republicans and the democrats, all our scum, instead pray for a super volcano to erupt midway between Wall Street and K Street. That should solve the scum problem.
Paul
October 29th, 2009
9:04 am
Taxpayer
May we conclude the other two points before embarking upon a third?
My point was Democrats proposed cuts to Medicare. Have you ever acknowledged that? If you have, do you think they’ll materialize? I don’t. If they do not, what are the implications?
Republicans have nefarious desires for Medicare? Stipulated. Now, back to Democrats…
Second point I made was that even though Dems hold Congress and the Executive, and have passed the largest Defense appropriations bill ever – you seem to make the point it’s Republicans who have sole responsibility. I can understand the historical emotion, but current facts seem to contradict that.
TnGelding
October 29th, 2009
9:41 am
Jimmy62
October 29th, 2009
7:42 am
It’s because there is spending and then there is spending.
TnGelding
October 29th, 2009
9:43 am
Paul
October 29th, 2009
7:35 am
Do you support the direct subsidies to insurance companies so they can offer extra benefits to Medicare recipients in order to “compete?”
TnGelding
October 29th, 2009
9:48 am
Paul
October 29th, 2009
7:54 am
I acknowledged it and provided links to how and why.
TnGelding
October 29th, 2009
9:55 am
Taxpayer
October 29th, 2009
8:18 am
Bush wanted to make the tax changes (cuts?) permanent. Senate rules required the 10 year limit.
Would that be the hand that feeds you?
TnGelding
October 29th, 2009
10:02 am
Taxpayer
October 29th, 2009
8:37 am
Republicans complaining about cuts to Medicare, a program they would have abolished if they thought they could have gotten away with it?
JM
October 29th, 2009
1:06 pm
As someone who lives in the area, I agree with Newt — it’s not up to outsiders to determine who best represents us in NYS. I didn’t appreciate the viciousness of tone that was aimed at Dede and our local GOP that typically enters when Sarah Palin and the talk radio crowd decide to get involved. We never had that style of a campaign around here. Hoffman, who is clueless on local issues and won’t debate, is letting the Club for Growth speak and do for him. That’s not someone I trust to be a strong representative in Washington. And I’m also pleased to see that Mitt Romney, always the adult, has stayed out of the race and the GOP civil war. He and Newt understand its about uniting under a big tent, not excluding people or holding an ideology litmus test with a one-size only for the entire country.