Newt endorses Princella Smith for Congress

Princella Smith, former spokesperson for American Solutions, is running for the House in Arkansas-01. She came to fame in 2004 when she won a MTV essay contest and earned a spot at the Republican National Convention.


When Newt founded American Solutions, Princella came on board and one of her duties was to be the chief advocate of the Platform of the American People as well as promoting the very successful "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" petition. She went from there to being the communications director for Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA).

Now, she is running for an open House seat that has not been held by a Republican since 1875 but which voted for John McCain by a margin of 59-38%. But that overstates the chances of getting the seat in Republican hands, because Arkansas has a history of voting GOP for President and voting Democrat down the rest of the ballot.

Still, with a good, energized campaign, a conservative candidate has got a good chance to win this district. And Newt Gingrich feels that Smith is the person to run such a campaign. He sent an e-mail to his Arkansas supporters in which he wrote, "Princella needs your help to make sure she can effectively carry the message of free-market ideas, energy independence and conservative ideals to the voters of the large First District."

An Arkansas-centered blog, tolbertreport.com, says that Smith told him that she expects Gingrich to help with fundraising and phone calls, with a visit possible if the former Speaker's schedule permits.

(Former Arkansas governor and possible 2012 contender Mike Huckabee has endorsed Rick Crawford.)

The Party of Yes

Among the most annoying liberal talking points of the last year and a half is them labeling the Republican Party, due to opposition of President Obama's agenda, "the party of no." Despite having plenty of counter proposals to Obama's ideas -- from the stimulus to health care reform -- the line has been repeated over and over.

Finally, Obama himself had to admit the GOP had plenty of their own ideas when Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) detailed what his idea of health reform would be at the President's health care summit. But that has not stopped the refrain in general.

Some conservatives have said they were fine with being so labeled. One of those is former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice president nominee Sarah Palin, who remarked at a recent rally: "And we’re saying, 'What's wrong with being the Party of No when you consider what it is that Obama, Pelosi and Reid are trying to do to our country? So be it!' "

In a statement before his speech at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Newt Gingrich took a different approach. It read:

It's not enough to say no to the radical agenda of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. Tonight's speech will explain why real leadership requires Republicans to offer a compelling vision of safety, prosperity, and freedom that stands in vivid contrast to Obama's secular, socialist, machine now running Washington.

On weeklystandard.com, Mary Katharine Ham wrote, "The problem with Republican communicators and politicians is that their 'compelling vision of safety, prosperity, and freedom' too often consists of saying, 'we have a compelling vision of safety, prosperity, and freedom.' " But, she said, "Newt's pretty good at making policy talk interesting -- creating a compelling vision with action items -- so it will be interesting to hear what I'd guess will be a practical vision wrapped up with some pretty good prose."

She was right, as he went down his usual laundry list of policies, including reducing the payroll tax and increased energy exploration. And on the topic of how to oppose policies from, in his words, "the most radical" in American history: "Our first answer should be, 'Let me tell you what I'm for,' and the answer should be first principles."

Coming out with "Eye of the Tiger" blasting, as he did at CPAC, he delivered the speech without a teleprompter. That led him to zing Obama that "when you speak from the heart, you don't need a teleprompter" and to add Obama "only reads parts of things, and he pretends to understand them."

In addition to talking up his past accomplishments, he discussed how to not just repeal and replace Obamacare but each piece of "radical" legislation passed by this President and Congress. "Stage one of the end of Obamaism will be a new Republican Congress in January that simply refuses to fund it," said Gingrich. Mocking those who have said it is not possible to repeal Obamacare, Newt snarked, "I think they forget that once upon a time I used to be Speaker of the House and I actually understand the legislative process. Under our Constitution, Congress doesn't have to pass the funding."

In setting up another compare-and-contrast between conservatives and progressives, he said, "This is a fundamental fight over the core definition of America...The more we make this a choice about the nature of America, the weaker they are."

National Journal wrote, "Before his SRLC address, several attendees expressed admiration for ex-AK Gov. Sarah Palin (R), but said they backed Gingrich because he was a more complete package."

Video and transcript of the speech can be found here at newt.org.

Gingrich: "A victory over the political machine"

In January, the Supreme Court, ruling 5-to-4, finally struck a blow for political free speech in easing up restrictions, many of which were laid out in the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. The case that was brought before the case involved Citizens United, David Bossie's production company, and their documentary "Hillary: the Movie."

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) ruled that the movie, which went after much of Hillary Clinton's past history and policy views, "couldn't be aired or even advertised," wrote Newt in a January newsletter. "Their reason? Sen. Clinton was a candidate for federal office, so Bossie's film was illegal under campaign finance law."

Citizens United sued, saying the First Amendment did not allow the government to deny speech in such a way. The Supreme Court agreed. Says Gingrich:

And the Supreme Court decision announced last week was not only a vindication of the free speech rights of all Americans, it was a significant step toward dismantling the incumbent-protecting political machine created by bureaucratic campaign finance "reforms" like McCain-Feingold.

By declaring that government has no business suppressing the political speech of groups like Citizens United, the Supreme Court has begun to make it easier for middle class candidates to take on the rich and the powerful....

The Founders understood the importance of the unfettered right of citizens to complain about their government. They recognized the danger of politicians controlling or censoring the debate about themselves. That's why they wrote in the First Amendment to the Constitution that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech.

These words and this right have been stunningly perverted by laws like McCain-Feingold, which was explicitly a case of Congress making a law abridging our freedom of speech -- incumbent politicians attempting to censor the people's discussion of whether they should remain in office.

Associatioins of citizens -- such as corporations and unions -- are not subject to government bureaucrats' rulings any longer as to arbitrary limits. Included in that was an overruling of a provision of McCain-Feingold that said corporate-funded ads could not be aired sixty days before federal elections and thirty days before primaries.

"Citizens United v. FEC doesn't threaten our democracy. It strengthens it by making it easier for middle-class candidates to compete against the wealthy and incumbents," writes Newt.

Newt's solution:

Real reform under our Constitution will only come when Americans and associations of Americans are allowed to give unlimited amounts of after-tax money to the candidates and campaigns of their choice. Dnors should be given this freedom and required to post on the Internet every night what they're spending and how they're spending. That way, voters would know who is funding whom, and how much. Armed with that knowledge, Americans can be trusted to make an informed, truly democratic choice. Predictably, just the prospect of voters making such a free and informed choice has the Washington establishment machine up in arms.

Countering President Obama's attack on the Court -- in which he said "The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington -- Newt wrote, "This, from the president who negotiated back-room deals with special interests in order to force Democratic health care reform on the American people. This, from a president whose massive expansion of government into the private sector has set off a stampede of lobbyists to Washington to claim their piece of the taxpayers' pie."

"But even more glaring than the hypocrisy is the obvious contempt that supporters of bureaucratic campaign finance have for the American people."

Newt with Georgia Governor Perdue

Numerous states -- fourteen at last count -- have filed a lawsuit against the federal government since the passage of Obamacare, with more contemplating one. Georgia is an interesting case, because it's Attorney General, a Democrat who is running for governor, has refused to file any such suit. However, the current governor, Republican Sonny Perdue, is in favor of one.

The day after Thurbert Baker announced his decision -- saying he looked at the Constitution and "came away with the feeling that there really is no legal basis" for suing -- Perdue said he would name a "special Attorney General" to challenge the federal health care legislation. "The governor said the state will probably go it alone on the suit to avoid any costs," wrote the Atlanta Journal Constitution. "If Georgia joined with the other 14 state challenging the health legislation, it would incur some legal costs, Perdue said."

On the Thursday after the vote to pass a bill that is clearly unconstitutional -- if for no other reason than the federal government will require each citizen to buy a product or be put in jail -- Perdue and Newt Gingrich held a joint press conference discussing ways to roll back and replace the bill.

Newt condemned the threats against elected officials that have been on the rise -- though the media only seem to cover voice mails to Democrats and not when the second-ranking House Republican gets his office shot up -- but added: "But look, I think there’s something very disingenuous about the Democratic leaders who attacked the tea party movement, who refused to hold town hall meetings, who refused to go back home, who kept the Congress locked up in Washington, and are now shocked that people are angry."

"I think the Democratic leadership has to take some moral responsibility for having behaved with such arrogance, in such a hostile way, that the American people are deeply upset," Gingrich added. "So let’s be honest with this. This is a game that they’re playing." He went on to say the Democrats ran "a machine that used corrupt tactics that bought votes that bullied people, and as a result has enraged much of the American people."

2012 polls

It needs to be said at the beginning that relying on polls two years before the Iowa caucuses is not the best thing to do. However, they do serve some purpose, and as such, a quick overview can reveal some things.One of the knocks against running Gingrich is his divisiveness. While that was true when he stepped down as Speaker of the House, he has done a very good job in recent years of rehabbing his image. Some of those events -- when he met with Hillary Clinton over health information technology, Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry on the climate, and most recently, Al Sharpton and President Obama on education -- have drawn ire from many conservatives.Their criticism has been largely silly, acting as if Gingrich has advocated for large-scale surrender of principles. All is he has done is tried to open a dialogue -- and he is confident his ideas will beat out those of the liberals he has met with. It was a message he spoke forcefully at CPAC.

Combined with that, as well as his focus on actual ideas and solutions, his popularity has been rising. In fact, in a June 2009 poll -- the last such poll I can find -- his popularity number with independents is split 37-38%. Being able to hold his own with that bloc is vital, of course, to any chance of victory. And chances are, when exposed to more of Newt's ideas, the 29% undecided will break more for him, handing him a win among unaffilated voters.

One of the interesting things the poll shows is that those under 30 are much more undecided than those above that age. Of course, much of that is because the older crowd remembers his days as Speaker, when he was target number one of the Clinton White House and liberal groups. The more people focus on the issues and reality, not the media spin and half-truths, the better it is for Newt.

Gingrich's standing in polls against President Obama have been improving, better than than the other top Republican contenders. A Public Policy Polling (PPP), a Democratic firm, survey from April 2009 showed Obama winning, 52-39%. But just two months later, the lead was down to 49-41% and Newt's numbers were better than Mike Huckabee (50-43) or Sarah Palin (52-40) and very close to Mitt Romney (48-40).

The next poll that pitted Obama and Gingrich was one from Clarus. It had Obama winning 48-36, right in the middle of the pack of GOP candidates. Romney did much better than every other Republican in the poll, trailing just by four points. Of course, that could be an outlier, or just an obvious result of having spent all of 2007 and two months in 2008 running for President already. His name identification is high.

President of Clarus Ron Faucheux said, "Gingrich improved his standing since the August poll when he was trailing Obama by 18 points. He's narrowed the gap to 12 points. Relative to Obama, Huckabee and Palin experienced only minimal improvement since August."

That is a pretty obvious sign that Gingrich is doing something that Huckabee and Palin are failing at. When combined with the results of Frank Luntz's focus groups that showed people warmed very much to Gingrich after actually his policy proposals, it would seem to suggest that over the course of a months-long campaign, Newt would only rise in the polls, while others would stagnate or fall.

Clarus also confirmed the findings of many polls that the former Speaker is at the top of the list of Republican spokesman, trailing only 2008 GOP Presidential nominee John McCain and the man who was second to McCain when he dropped out, Romney, among Republican voters. A Gallup poll from May 2009, for example, found Gingrich tied with Rush Limbaugh for first.

This Will Not Stand

Newt's e-mail today:

This will not stand.

No one should be confused about the outcome of Sunday's vote.

This is not the end of the fight - it is the beginning of the fight.

The American people spoke decisively against a big government, high tax, Washington knows best, pro-trial lawyer, centralized and bureaucratic health system.

In every recent poll the vast majority of Americans opposed this monstrosity.

Speaker Pelosi knew the country was against the bill. That is why she kept her members trapped in Washington and forced a vote on Sunday.

She knew if she let the members go home their constituents would convince them to vote no.

The Obama-Pelosi-Reid machine combined the radicalism of Alinsky, the corruption of Springfield and the machine power politics of Chicago.

Sunday was a pressured, bought, intimidated vote worthy of Hugo Chavez but unworthy of the United States of America.

It is hard to imagine how much pressure they brought to bear on congressman Stupak to get him to accept a cynical, phony clearly illegal and unconstitutional executive order on abortion. The ruthlessness and inhumanity of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid machine was most clearly on display in their public humiliation of Stupak.

The real principles of the machine were articulated by Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings who was impeached and removed from the bench as a federal judge, before being elected to the House when he said "There ain't no rules here, we're trying to accomplish something...All this talk about rules...When the deal goes down...we make 'em up as we go along."

It is hard for the American people to believe their leaders on the Left are this bad. They are.

The American people will not allow a corrupt machine to dictate their future.

Together we will pledge to repeal this bill and start over

Together we will prove that this will not stand.

2010 and 2012 will be among the most important elections in American history.

These elections will allow us to save America from a left-wing machine of unparalleled corruption, arrogance and cynicism.

Sunday was one more step in the fight against a "Washington knows best" and "Washington should run everything" attitude.

Let us turn now to the Senate to continue this fight for real reform, for real self government, and for policies that create jobs, improve health outcomes, and increase freedom.

To help continue this fight, please consider making a contribution of $15, $25 or whatever you can, right here.

Together, we will ensure that this does not stand.

Drillgate: Department of Interior cover up

When Congress lifted the 27-year-ban on offshore drilling in September 2008, many were skeptical if Barack Obama would actually allow for exploration if he ended up winning the election. Those doubts have proved to be well-deserved.

Any federal agency will undergo a "public comment" period when undergoing a a rule change such as that. That part of the process had already started by the time Obama was inaugurated. "Ken Salazar, Obama’s new Secretary of Interior, determined the decision about new offshore drilling was so important that he ordered a six-month extension to the comment period," writes Vince Haley on biggovernment.com. Haley, Newt Gingrich's former research director and current head of Renewing American Leadership, quotes Salazar a couple of months into the new administration saying that Obama sought “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government," adding “these are not decisions that are going to be made behind closed doors.”

Short of "maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is that they want to do," as Salazar put it," Interior has yet to release the count -- even though the comment period ended five months ago. As could be surmised, the number of pro-drilling comments was much higher than those against. In fact, 530,000 comments were submitted. Roughly 350,000, or 2/3, favored the expansion of drilling; of those, "American Solutions alone delivered 90,358 pro-drilling comments, one of the largest submissions for a single organization."

Sensing something was fishy, Newt's 527, American Solutions began to request information about the tabulation, which wrapped up on September 25. A month later, after no results were released but "sources [indicating]" that the comments were already counted, the group filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. On that same day, a spokesman for the Minerals Management Service (MMS) said a "detailed breakdown" would be released soon.

Two weeks later, MMS says they do not have the final count and, in the words of American Solutions, say "the request was too large and asked for justification why releasing the information was in the public interest."

With nothing coming forth, a month after that "transparent" replay, American Solutions "filed a second, more specific, FOIA request with MMS explaining why it was in the public's interest to release the information." Ten days later, the agency says they will respond by January 19th -- only to push it back again using a 10-workday extension as the excuse.

Finally, MMS released internal e-mails, one of which Tyler writes about:

In an email dated October 27, 2009, Liz Birnbaum, director of the Minerals Management Service, informs other Interior officials that a preliminary tabulation of the results of the comment period had not yet gone to Secretary Salazar, adding “[s]o the Secretary can honestly say in response to any questions that he’s [SIC] has not yet seen the analysis of the comments -- staff is still working on it. I did, however, confirm to him the 2-1 split that these guys [at American Solutions] are emphasizing.”

That shows that the cover up began almost instantly after the early results came in.

Still, the day after the damning e-mails were released, MMS denies having a final tally, and claim that is the reason it has not been released to the public.

A second bath of documents were supposed to be released due to the FOIA request, but American Solutions' website says: "MMS wrote to American Solutions that it had taken a five business-day extension for processing the second half of the documents requested by the FOIA, due to inclement weather that had closed down federal offices. The letter was sent six days after MMS had promised that the documents would be delivered." Two days later, the agency says the papers in questions will be released "as soon as possible."

On the very next day, in a seperate matter, MMS informs the Justice Department they missed "a court-ordered environmental analysis of drilling in Alaska. The assessment began a year before and is required to be completed before any new drilling can begin in the Beaufort, Bering, and Chukchi seas."

In the latest news surrounding Drillgate, American Solutions filed another FOIA request on March 2nd after confirmation that public comments ran 2-1.

This is another example of how government runs. Does anyone want this style of bureaucracy deciding when and where -- and even whether -- a life-saving operation will occur?

27th anniversary of the "Evil Empire" speech

Newt sent out an e-mail today, highlighting the fact that March 1983 was a very important month in the ultimate demise of the Soviet Union.

It has been been twenty-seven years ago today that President Reagan, against the advice of many in his own administration and to the consternation of many internationally, called the murderous regime an "Evil Empire." Looking back, it can be easy to downplay how much courage it took to stand up against the foreign policy establishment and many world leaders.

On the heels of that, "fifteen days later, on March 23, Reagan unveiled his vision for the research, development, and ultimate deployment of a missile defense shield that would one day end the vulnerability of America and her allies to Soviet nuclear attack," writes Gingrich. "While both speeches were widely ridiculed at the time, they are today rightly hailed as having made decisive contributions to bringing about the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union a little less than nine years later."

Audio of Reagan's two speeches.

Video of Newt's AEI presentation on the two speeches back in March 2008.

The Health Care Summit

On February 27th, President Obama hosted congressional leaders for a health care summit. In advancement of it, Newt laid out his vision, both in a Time article and at the Conservative Political Action Conference, for how Republicans should handle it; many conservatives bashed him, with some wanting to boycott the event altogether. To them, even saying "bipartisanship" was treasonous; a member of redstate.com created a thread titled "Newt Gingrich is a freaking idiot." But Newt's idea of bipartisanship is much different than, say, Lindsay Graham's, which the critics did not understand.

Much of what the Republicans did at the summit -- list specifically what they had problems with and offer alternative solutions -- was what Newt advocated; he did not advocate for an agreement for the sake of a deal.

The Republicans came out looking so good, with even the mainstream media saying they had concrete proposals, that many who called for them to skip the event -- including radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity -- admitted they were wrong; Limbaugh doing so just a few hours into the summit.

Those two did not viciously attack the former Speaker the way many online. And worse, none of them retracted their criticism of him after the fact that his strategy worked out very well. While the effort the Republicans put forth may not, in the end, stop health care reform from passing -- but it did stop the media from prattling on about the "party of no" and put a good face on the party.

Newt hosted a health care summit of his own -- much like he has had held his own job summits the same week as Obama's -- and filmed a recap of it.

Making a trip to Iowa

As he has done several times, Gingrich will be heading to the first presidential caucus state in late May. He has already visited New Hampshire, which holds the first primary in 2012, in January.

"Newt certainly hasn't ruled out a run and Iowa is an important political state for 2010," said his spokeseman Rick Tyler. "I know he has his mind focused on 2010, and he will be doing what he can to help the party."