Saturday, October 15, 2011

Have you checked out the new site?

Yesterday, released their new volunteer site, complete with materials to print out, a downloadable 21st Century Contract with America, and other resources.

Take a look please, and sign up to help out the campaign.

Tonight this was posted on Newt's Facebook wall:
The campaign is spending well within its donation limits, and has not added to its debt. In fact, it has paid off 25% of its debt in a very short period of time. Donations are averaging $76 per donor, and over 500 signed up to volunteer in the last two weeks of September. Newt will be opening headquarters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Caroling this month -- all due to the continued support of grassroots efforts. Thank you to each of you, and please continue your good work! Together we can restore America.

Newt discusses latest GOP Debate and "9-9-9"


(Video) Newt's interview with Megyn Kelly from Friday


Friday, October 14, 2011

Newt 2012 Policy Director Vince Haley on judicial supremacy

From the piece on, responding to Think Progress (a hack website funded by George Soros:
Gingrich rejects judicial supremacy, which was first articulated as dicta in Cooper v. Aaron. In judicial decisions, as Millhiser surely knows, dicta is different from the actual legal reasoning that supports the holding of a judicial decision. In Cooper, the Court’s assertion of judicial interpretative supremacy of the Constitution vis-à-vis the other two branches of the federal government was not necessary as a basis of its holding that state governments, in this case Arkansas, had to abide by the Court’s decisions. Article VI of the Constitution, which holds that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land “any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding,” was more than an adequate basis for the decision.

Yet, in Millhiser’s telling, Gingrich’s observation that the Court claimed judicial supremacy for itself for the first time in Cooper amounts to opposition to desegregation.
Here is the link to the full piece again.

The site is now up to 239 members. Please go over and sign up. We're trying to build a grassroots organization for Newt 2012. A lot of good conversation going on over there.

Letter to the editor in the Des Moines Register

Here's the full letter:
Thanks again to Kathie Obradovich for a fine Oct. 6 column, “Voters Look Around; Newt Reinvigorated.” Newt Gingrich may not be the best campaigner, but he puts good leadership plans on the table. His 21st Century Contract with America is better than anything coming from the other candidates.

We need Gingrich’s knowledge of what works and what does not and his knowledge of government structure and history. While other candidates are trying to put together plans, Gingrich’s plan is ready to go into effect on day one of his presidency. In the shape we’re in, we cannot afford to wait, and we can’t afford an inexperienced politician fumbling around to get America back on track.

Any further debates need to stay focused on plans and policy, not the playground spats that seem to be the norm. Our need for a knowledgeable leader is urgent and past due. Gingrich is the one to fill that need.

— Jim Daggs, Ackley
The only quibble I have is that Newt and his current team are great at campaigning. It was the people who had only been with Newt for a couple of months -- like, oh, the current campaign manager of the Perry campaign or the top adviser of that campaign -- and then quit Newt 2012 who might not be the greatest at campaigning.

Read why a member of the Charleston Tea Party is endorsing Newt

Chris Horne wrote on yesterday:
After careful consideration, a lot of prayer and my faith in God’s guidance, I have made my selection for 2012. I choose Newt Gingrich as my candidate and now I’ll tell you why. I honestly do not feel we can afford to take a chance with inexperience at this crucial time in our nation. I’ve looked at many issues such as the economy, job loss, bailouts, earmarks, healthcare and more. I have taken the time to really listen with a discerning ear to each candidate speak, especially in town halls where I can hear more than a 30 second clip and I have considered the character and ability and experience of each candidate to see which one aligns more closely to what I believe is best for my country. There has been no other time I can think of in the history of our country when wisdom and proven leadership ability has been more needed than it is now. I personally do not believe we can afford another disastrous term in the oval office. Newt’s "21st Century Contract for America" does what I’ve wanted from a candidate for years. It lays down a specific plan in black and white exactly what he will do, when he will do it and how he will do it, and in terms I can understand. It provides accountability and speaks to the true effectiveness and qualification of the man.


I found that passion in Newt Gingrich. His love for this country is tangible. You can actually feel his love for this country and for the Lord whenever he speaks. The bottom line is, I believe him. He doesn’t need notes or a teleprompter. He is genuinely concerned about the direction of this country and sincere in his dedication to take her back to her founding principles.
Please go here and read the rest.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Newt responds to CBS "legal analyst" Andrew Cohen

Gingrich rejects this theory of judicial supremacy that Cohen restates, which holds that interpretations of the Constitution are binding interpretations on the other two branches. If the Supreme Court renders decisions that the President and Congress believe are unconstitutional, then Gingrich believes the executive and legislative branches are bound by their oaths of office to use their constitutional powers to check and balance unconstitutional decisions of the Court.


In his piece, Cohen quotes Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe, who said that Gingrich’s ideas represent a “frontal assault on the independence of the federal judiciary, which is a bulwark of a constitutional system that has served us well as a nation ever since Marbury v. Madison.”

First off, citing Marbury v. Madison as the fountain of the Constitutional authority for the powers of the judicial branch is a customary thing that defenders of the model of an all-powerful federal judiciary do. Professor Tribe should and certainly does know better. The Supreme Court defining the parameters of its own authority in its own judicial decisions is no different than Congress defining their Constitutional authority from a joint resolution passed by both Houses of Congress, or the President defining his/her Constitutional authority via an executive order. Thus, the text of the Constitution and the writings of the Founders must be consulted for a meaningful answer about the powers of the federal judiciary. Otherwise, the Supreme Court derives its authority from its own opinions of its authority.

President Thomas Jefferson and Congress abolished over half of all federal judgeships after the election of 1800. Article I, Section 8 empowers Congress to create lower federal courts, which implies the power to abolish them. The Supreme Court in Stuart v. Laird implicitly acknowledged the judicial branch’s acceptance of the constitutionality of abolishing lower federal courts.
There is much more in the piece posted at Go check it out.

Two more polls, one national and one of Florida, show Newt in third

The national one showing Newt in third was conducted by Rasmussen Reports. The Florida poll was done by American Research Group.

Unfortunately, neither poll has the in-depth findings like the PPP surveys, so there's not much info beyond the simple headline. (No favorability ratings, for example.)

But it's more evidence that Newt is going up and that Perry continues to drop.

To keep the Newt 2012 train going, please consider giving what you can in terms or money or volunteering.

Today, a great Newt supporter, Susan Reaney, tweeted:
I have a part-time job but I managed to find $10 to support the Newt Gingrich campaign @Newt2012HQ

Monica Crowley on Newt's polling surge

The conservative writer on her blog today under the heading "Newt on the March?":
But there's something else here, which brings me to my third point: As we get closer to the general election campaign, voters are trying to visualize how it will go down. In less than 12 months, we will have already had at least one presidential debate. We're trying to picture the GOP candidate at a podium next to Barack Obama, he of the silver-tongue. More and more of us are coming to the conclusion that Newt---and ONLY Newt---could wipe the floor with Obama. He'd kill him politically with facts and conservatism. No other GOP candidate could destroy Obama in a debate so completely as Gingrich.

Newt's newsletter this week is about Columbus Day (and I touch on the SC news)

The whole thing is worth reading, but here is an excerpt:
Our history is crowded with people who came to America and achieved what was not possible at home. For millions of immigrants, America has meant a life freer and more prosperous than they had before. And individually, they have made historic contributions to this country. Albert Einstein, one of our greatest scientists, immigrated from Nazi Germany. Sergey Brin, a founder of Google, came here from the Soviet Union. I. M. Pei, one of our greatest architects, was born in China. Alexander Graham Bell, Irving Berlin, Cary Grant, Bob Hope, and Madeleine Albright all immigrated to the United States.

From the beginning, being an American has meant striving to form a nation of people from such different origins as these. These immigrants and many others brought with them cultures and ideas that shaped our society profoundly. At times, these interactions have been far from perfect. But starting with the earliest settlers, the trend has been toward greater recognition of individuals' equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
(Going back to yesterday's great news out of South Carolina: I just wanted to say that Adam Waldeck, who will be heading up the Newt 2012 effort in the Palmetto State, is a great guy. He's done a terrific job as the campaign's Coalitions Director the last few months, bringing in diverse groups, such as those concerned with the Dodd-Frank bill, those in the Lean Six Sigma field, individuals wanting to enforce the 10th Amendment, and others.)

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Newt to get several South Carolina tea party endorsements in the coming days

From Peter Hamby of CNN:
Sensing opportunity in a state with a vibrant tea party movement, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is beefing up his campaign presence in South Carolina.

Gingrich's national Coalitions Director, Adam Waldeck, is re-locating to Columbia to run political operations in the first-in-the-south primary state.

The Gingrich campaign is also planning to roll out several tea party endorsements in the Charleston area in the coming days. One prominent tea party leader in the state, Columbia activist Allen Olsen, endorsed Gingrich in September.

Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond said the campaign is building "a grassroots firewall" in South Carolina, a state that could be friendly to Gingrich given his roots in nearby Georgia.

Newt now third nationally behind Cain and Romney, says @ppppolls

Here is the full poll that Public Policy Polling teased yesterday.

The headline, of course, is that Newt has moved ahead of Perry for third place.

Plenty of other good news: his favorability is 57/30%, which suggests he still has plenty of room to grow in the poll.

PPP writes "there's no doubt Gingrich is the candidate besides Cain who's had the most momentum on their side in the last month. His net favorability has increased 20 points from +7 at 46/39 to +27 at 57/30. And his share of the vote has increased from 10% to 15%. In an extremely fluid field he could yet prove to be a serious contender."

34% of Newt's supporters are "strongly committed," compared to 31% for Romney and 30% for Cain.

Gingrich ranks second among people's second choice. Cain is at 24% and Newt is at 15%. (The fact that Romney is not the second choice of many suggest that he has probably hit his ceiling or come close to it.)

Newt once again shows good numbers across-the-board: 52-34% among moderates, 57-29% among somewhat conservative voters, and 64-24% among very conservative voters.

He draws 15% support from men and 16% from women. (When will the media start reporting on the fact that Newt keeps drawing equal support from the two genders?)

Newt draws nearly equal support from all age groups.

Video of just Newt's answers from the #econdebate

(And isn't that how it should always be?)


(Video) Newt's interview with Greta after #econdebate


Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Public Policy Polling will release a national poll Wednesday showing Newt above Perry

Big news today on Twitter. I'll have more about the poll when PPP releases the poll in full tomorrow.

Audio of Newt on the Jeff Katz Show this morning


They discuss the economy, tonight's debate, and the Occupy Wall Street...folks.

Take a look at these pictures taken by a Newt 2012 volunteer, Jim Shinn

I am slowing in posting this, but Jim Shinn, who volunteers at the Newt 2012 Atlanta office, went to Dawsonville, Georgia, last week to help out on a 21st Century Contract with America event there.

He took some great pictures. Here is the link to his blog, where he collected them all. He also took a few before Newt appeared on Sean Hannity's TV show last Thursday.

(Video) Newt on Face the Nation Sunday


Following up on his speech at the Values Voter Summit Friday, Newt went on Face the Nation and discussed his proposal to rein in judges, getting them back under the Constitution.

Here is the link to that speech at the Values Voter Summit.

And here is the position paper Newt 2012 released on the topic.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Peter Ferrara on 21st Century Contract with America

Peter Ferrara, who was in the Reagan White House, wrote a terrific article about Newt's 21st Century Contract with America. Some excerpts:
In the 1994 Congressional campaigns, Republicans not only rode Newt's Contract with America proposals to Republican majorities in Congress. They maintained their House majority for 12 years, after Republicans had only held a House majority for 2 of the previous 74 years.

Newt's 21st century contract is similarly a document on which the entire Republican Party can campaign next year, and win a generation of governing majorities.
Gingrich's economic recovery plan would also abolish the capital gains tax, because "At a zero percent rate, hundreds of billions of dollars in new investments would pour into the United States to create new firms and build new factories." By effectively double-taxing capital income, the capital gains levy discourages the venture capital that feeds start-ups and creates jobs. That is why 14 out of 30 OECD countries, plus China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and others, already enjoy zero capital gains taxes. Gingrich's Contract would further eliminate double taxation by abolishing the death tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Art Laffer, a central architect of Reaganomics, says regarding Gingrich's economic recovery plan, "The combination of pro-growth tax reform, spending restraint, and sound money will restore robust economic growth with low unemployment and low inflation," and praises "the powerful effect it will have on the future growth path of the United States economy." Indeed, Gingrich has the formula for another generation long economic boom achieved by freeing a dynamic economy that is straining to break out of the bonds of Obamanomics.
Ferrara quotes from Newt what the former will push for after repealing Obamacare:
I will advocate for specific replacement health policies that will create a free market framework for health care, provide affordable, portable, and reliable healthcare coverage, and establish a health care safety net focused on those in need. This system will assure health care for all with no individual mandate or employer mandate of any kind. This alternative to Obamacare begins with patient power and localism and the many common sense ideas developed over the past eight years at the Center for Health Transformation.
Back to Ferrara:
The specific Contract proposals implementing this vision include "a voluntary option for younger Americans to put a portion of their Social Security contribution into personal Social Security savings accounts.
On Medicare, Ferrara again quotes from Newt:
My proposed legislation will offer seniors new choices in Medicare, as well. It will give them the option to choose, on a voluntary basis, either to remain in the existing program, or to transition to a more personalized system in the private sector with greater options for better care. If they select the personalized system, beneficiaries would receive support to cover their private sector premiums. Giving all seniors the option to choose their insurance provider will improve price competition and help lower costs for the program.
More Newt:
There are 184 other means-tested entitlement programs that can be block granted in a similar manner to our reform in 1996. One program alone -- Medicaid -- could save the federal government over $700 billion in the next decade, according to Congressman Paul Ryan's 2012 Republican Budget. Not only would these programs be more responsive and dynamic on a state level, but Americans would save hundreds of billions of federal tax dollars every year.
Ferrara concludes the piece:
Gingrich's Contract advances other path-breaking ideas, such as using Congress's powers to reorganize the federal judiciary and regulate the jurisdiction of the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, to rein in judicial activism, enforcing the Tenth Amendment, and unleashing the private sector to produce the maximum in American energy. Most exciting, Newt's Contract launches all of these ideas into the mainstream of the Republican Party.
While it probably seems like I quoted the whole article, there is a ton I didn't. I encourage you to read the entire article here.

Ferrara has wrote other pieces praising Newt's ideas -- here, here, and here.

(Video) Newt at Versailles Restaurant in Miami

(This is older, almost a month old, but there really hasn't been a time to post it before now.)


(Video) Newt discussing Strong America Now in Ames

(Just as a note on Tuesday night's debate: It's on Bloomberg TV, so if you are like most (including me) who do not get that channel, you can stream it live on at 8 PM ET.)

Link. (It runs 2 minutes, 58 seconds, so take a quick look please.)

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Watch this video by a Newt supporter. It's...superb.


Newt: "The Root-and-Branch Candidate"

(Thank you to Gary Moss for passing along this article.)

Below the title of the article is the line: "Gingrich doesn’t want to beat just Obama, but statism, too." (An interesting side note is that Sarah Palin likes to use root-and-branch imagery a lot.)

Some excerpts:

[Gingrich] knows how to play the game, but he has always had his own very strong ideas about how it ought to be played — and he has been the smartest guy in the room enough times to realize counterrevolutions are not impossible, even if the conventional wisdom says so.

Newt will never be the safe candidate. But he could be the root-and-branch candidate. And the branch he is currently targeting for deracination is the federal judiciary. In his “21st Century Contract with America,” a bold action item is: “Bringing the courts back under the Constitution and the rule of law.”

And bold it is. For more than a half-century, it has been monotonously proclaimed that the judges are the last word on what the law is, and, therefore, that not only the litigants in the case but the whole of society must yield to their decisions. It has become easy to forget — or to have never known — that it was not always this way. As Gingrich argues in a position paper he rolled out with a speech on Friday, there is nothing in the Constitution that stands for this proposition. It is a promotion the Warren court gave itself in 1958, in a gambit Stanford Law School dean Larry Kramer aptly described as “not reporting a fact so much as trying to manufacture one.”

If he were elected president, Gingrich promises, he would pursue a series of concrete steps to reestablish the original balance of constitutional power — the balance designed to ensure that Americans decided important affairs of state democratically rather than having decisions imposed on them by unelected lawyers. In passing laws, the political branches would make use of Congress’s constitutional authority to deny courts jurisdiction to hear categories of cases, something about which progressives will no doubt least until someone catalogues the provisions to avoid judicial review that are written into the Obamacare statute.

Following the example of President Jefferson and the early 19th century Congress, Gingrich foresees the political branches’ eliminating courts that consistently attempt to rewrite the laws and impose their personal predilections. In particularly egregious cases, judges could be impeached for ignoring the Constitution and failing to heed the legitimate prerogatives of the political branches. Congress could use its power of the purse to defund enforcement of lawless rulings, and the political branches could ignore them -- as they did in the Civil War era with respect to aspects of the notorious Dred Scott decision. We could go back to the Lincoln formulation, which conceded the binding nature of judicial rulings on private litigants in a particular case but denied that these rulings operated as precedents binding on the American people and their elected representatives.
Here is the link to the full article again.

(Video) Newt's interview on Huckabee from Saturday

This page is not affiliated with any political campaign or party.

  © Blogger template Webnolia by 2009

Back to TOP