I wrote this yesterday morning after getting up and reading that Newt Gingrich was fired up and unhappy about the applause of the audience being asked to be held during the debate so we could hear more candidate answers vice a bunch of crowd noise---why did this inspire me to write this?  Because Newt sounded like a populist narcissist complaining about not getting his "play to the crowd" feedback.  I won't change what I wrote below.  After hearing the stuff that is coming out today, I only checked to make sure that I had not made an incorrect or false statement.  I hesitated to put this out because I want the negative spew to stop, but I still think I need to reach out to family and friends to put some consideration into their voting.   Let's focus on what candidates are telling us they will do as President.  I'm sorry that Newt felt he needed to say let's colonize the moon today---how is that going to balance our budget???  


January 24, 2012 - 

• I have to make a point because this election is so important and I have prayed that I won't let politics cause me upset, so I ask that my friends nor family take any offense, as none is intended to their thought processes or abilities to analyze, but only that you will consider my input.  I know so many think that Governor Romney is the establishment candidate and my Tea Party mindset wants to recoil automatically.  I suppose that is why I initially threw my support behind Mr. Herman Cain, another business man in the race, and truly an outsider from outside politics almost altogether.  The main stream media managed to take him out, which is what has happened to all Obama's prior opponents, especially in Illinois---they were "taken out" effectively, in McCain's case, if not actually, in his Senate race (his opponent was forced to withdraw from the race).  That left me in a position where I wanted to support Newt Gingrich, whom I had initially hoped would run against President Bush in his last run for President after President Bush showed his hand on his ideas regarding immigration.  Soon after he was re-elected, I continued to get Newt's information, books, and subscribed to his podcast (yes I paid to listen to his ideas).   I had reasons to question all the candidates and decided to learn more about them, so I read Governor Romney's book and I did look at his term in Massachusetts, a state so sorely oppressed by liberal socialists it is disgusting.  I read about and studied all the candidates of the time, Paul, Perry, Gingrich, Bachman, Huntsman, and Romney.  I can deal with starting out in one position and ending up knowing better---haven't we all along the way--and pretty much all the candidates have changed some positions, most understandable changes and for the better.  Romney gave the people of Mass. what they were demanding in health care, as best as he could shape it, and guess what, as we know, it can never work, but going bankrupt is not something socialist believe can happen since it isn't their money.  Romney is against national health care and he knows from the Mass. experiment that it won't work on an even bigger scale.  His book is surprising in the depth of understanding of where we stand inside the country and in the world as a nation and world power---and what is the way forward in AMERICA's best interest.  The book has been out a while and he isn't changing his ideas that he put out in No Apology.  He puts our current problems in historical perspective and he isn't playing to your emotions, but to your mind.

• I am tired of the cult of personality that has permeated our culture since President Clinton.  We do not need another egoist / egotist, narcissist, pompous, etc.  President Reagan was not all about himself; he swayed crowds with a foundation in a philosophy that he CONSISTENTLY espoused and acted on.  Newt is now positioning himself as a Tea Party conservative and that is NOT where Newt has been for years, if truly he ever was (he was after all a Rockefeller Republican (progressive) way back in the 60s).  Newt Gingrich began to openly champion big-government progressivism in the current era as soon as he thought it was the most popular.  His positions and ideas on global warming, immigration, the proper size and activity of government and his willingness to "reach across the aisle" is exactly what made him unpopular to me as I had at first joined his ideas for America group and subscribed to him in the early 2000s and then dropped it once I heard WHAT he actually advocated.  In fact, remember the LISTENING TOUR right after President Obama took office?  Newt was involved in all that malarkey and from that tossing of CONSERVATIVES out with the bath water that the TEA PARTY movement was born from pure people frustration.  Newt helped the Tea Party movement come about, but not by positive inspiration or leadership, but quite the opposite, by showing us that certain Republican politicians would proclaim the era of Reagan dead if they thought it would make them popular!  What does "era of Reagan" mean anyway?  It was code for CONSERVATIVE and I don't mean NEOCON or such, I mean "radical, rugged-individualism CONSERVATIVE" -- think of John Wayne, Ronald Reagan, Patrick Henry, etc.

The culture of personality will lead us only to further deception.