Another election year is almost under way and primary battle lines are being drawn as we speak. Recently Newt Gingrich formally announced his entrance into the 2012 Republican primary race for President of the United States. He now joins the ranks with Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Gary Johnson, and several other less notable names from the Republican Party. The first Republican primary debate now lies in the history books. News outlets have dedicated incredible airtime to Newt’s announcement. The Republican pundits are abuzz with talking points lauding the former Speaker of the House. For years the media painted Newt as the epitome of the staunch Conservative. Most republican voters cannot fathom or entertain the idea that Newt would be anything other than a true Constitutional conservative Republican. Unfortunately, the facts regarding Newt’s political views and voting record tell a far more ominous tale. Newt’s history will prove to be a very “inconvenient truth” for many conservatives who care to examine the data, rather than living in a fairy tale land where Speaker Gingrich’s past is as pure and shiny as the yellow brick road. Let’s meet the real Newt Gingrich!
For years the public has been inundated with a media deluge of false information regarding the “conservatism” of Newt Gingrich and a host of other RINO’s (Republican In Name Only). Newt’s actions, words, and voting record reveal an insidious political genius on his part to fool conservative voters. The average conservative voter today believes that Newt is a proponent of small, limited government and fiscally conservative. To our country’s detriment, the truth exposes a completely different narrative on the former Speaker of the House’s political philosophy and the people and authors who shaped his world view.
We will first examine Newts position regarding the sovereignty of the United States. Does Newt believe as our founders that we are a sovereign nation and should refuse any outside influence from other nations and not align ourselves with those countries whose political philosophies are at odds with those of the United States Constitution? Newt is a self-professed globalist. He is more concerned with the global world than with the interests of our sovereign nation. One piece of evidence against Speaker Gingrich is the fact that he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A NY Times article, decrying Newt’s Foreign policy positions exposed the fact that the Congressman was “schooled” by Henry Kissinger. Henry Kissinger is an avowed globalist who believes that sovereign national boundaries should be abolished and the nation-state should be eradicated. Mr. Kissinger has influenced many political leaders throughout the decades of this country’s history. Many of those policies have been to the detriment to the United States and the American people. In The Economist, an article entitled “The Internationalists” states, “If . . . Clinton and Gingrich as good internationalists want to keep this isolationism in check, they have work to do in their own parties. Strange as it may seem in these days of loud ‘contrast politics,’ on this issue they are on the same side.” (March 11, 1995) When asked to summarily describe Newt Gingrich, former Secretary of State Warren Christopher answered “an internationalist”.
Newt also shows his true nature by disregarding the interests of the American public by supporting legislation like NAFTA and GATT. The former of which can now be shown to be the cause of thousands of American jobs moving overseas. Opponents of NAFTA warned that the result would be American corporations leaving the U.S. in order to avoid the regulation, overhead, and take advantage of the cheaper labor in order to increase their bottom line and profits. Thinkprogress.org author, Alex Seitz-Wald, entitled a March 15, 2011 article “Gingrich: NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico”. In this article Alex cites the transcripts from the Howie Carr radio show. The transcript records a caller confronting Newt regarding his support for NAFTA and the resulting loss of jobs after its passage.
CALLER: Back in the ’90s I remember Ross Perot saying that there was going to be the giant sucking sound of jobs if NAFTA passed. I think it ended up being true, right? And I know you were a big free trader.
GINGRICH: Yeah, well, I don’t think it was true in Mexico. I think the fact is that NAFTA allowed us to build jobs in Canada, the United States, and Mexico, in competition with China. I mean, our big competitor is not Mexico. Our big competitor is China and India. And I’d rather have jobs close to the United States than have jobs overseas in places like China and India. That’s why I was in favor of it. … So in a sense, I’d like our neighborhood to be fairly well off and fairly prosperous.
Newt’s response exposes the fact that he is more concerned for the global community than he is for Americans and the sovereignty of this nation.
How does former Speaker Gingrich stack up against the Constitution and our founder’s view of government? Once again he fails miserably. Mr. Gingrich said “I believe in a very strong central government. You can have a strong but limited government.” Unfortunately this Orwellian double-speak is completely false and at odds regarding the Constitutional Republic form of government our founders handed down to us. Compare Newt’s statement with this quote from James Madison in The Federalist No. 45,
Alleged Danger From the Powers of the Union to the State Governments Considered,
Independent Journal Saturday, January 26, 1788:
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
Our founders did not advocate a “strong central government”, but rather a very limited government with multiple checks and balances with the majority of the decisions being made at the state level and rights being reserved to the States or to the people. The federal government was never to wield more power than the States or the people. In this point, once again Newt Gingrich reveals himself as a big government proponent, thereby nixing the very idea that he is a “conservative”.
How has Newt aligned himself in his associations in Congress? Did he align himself with genuine conservatives or others like himself? Truth is truly stranger than fiction. After a 10 year break from politics Dr. Ron Paul threw his hat in the ring to gain his current congressional seat. Dr. Paul may arguably be one of the staunchest defenders of the Constitution in our day. Judge Andrew Napolitano called him the “Thomas Jefferson of our day”. When Dr. Paul entered the race there was another Republican who ran for the same seat. Did Newt back Dr. Paul or the establishment lackey who ran against him in the primary? You can probably guess the answer to that question. He not only supported Dr. Paul’s opponent, but persuaded 50 of his congressional cohorts to also announce their support for Ron Paul’s adversary in the primary. Even President Bush came out in support of Dr. Paul’s political opponent at the request of Newt Gingrich. Newt better resembles a RINO rather than a Constitutional Conservative.
In conclusion, there can be no doubt on where Newt Gingrich stands. He stands in opposition to our founders, he stands in opposition to our Constitution, and he stands in opposition to the safety, sovereignty, and welfare of the American people. Most importantly, he stands against everything that a genuine Constitutional conservative voter believes. He supports global governance more that American sovereignty. He supports legislation which increases the size and scope of government. He voted for legislation which sent thousands of American jobs overseas. He stood shoulder to shoulder with the opponent of a candidate who is a strict Constitutional conservative. On all points Newt receives an F minus. You now know who the real Newt Gingrich is. Now you must decide whether this man stands for anything that you, an American conservative, believe. Can you in good conscience vote for a man whose voting record reveals that he is a big government, big spending globalist? Can you make this man President whose votes are responsible for the loss of jobs in the United States and destruction of our industrial economic power? Can you elect this man when legislation which he supported increased the national debt, the crisis which we are now facing? He has a part in it, yet some people will still give him a pass? If you can, in good conscience, send this man to the White House again, will you please do those of us who are genuine Constitutional Conservatives a favor? Please stop calling yourself a conservative.
By William Tolp