Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich

Having read Newt's book, listed on the right - I have to agree with the following statement on "Cowboy Bytes" about the debates - a comment from Silverscribler:

"... I like Bachmann, but I’m afraid the media is deliberately stacking the field against her because they don’t want a conservative woman in office, no matter how good she might be. I think we need to begin taking a real serious look at Gingrich. yeah, I know they talk about him having “baggage,” but I think that can be overcome. Some may say he is another rino, but we need to reconsider that sentiment. He didn’t get a chance to make much of a performance in either debates because the groups pretty much turned boh of them into a Perry–Romney show. The rules say that if another person is named, that person gets a rebuttal. Well, notice Perry and Romney consistently named each other and very seldom named any of the other candidates–so the other folks had very little opportunity to express themselves.

As for Gingrich, he is one of the most knowledgeable persons in the country on American history–real American history, not the watered down, politically correct crap our kids are getting. Check out his “City on a Hill, which is the story of American exceptionalism.

In the debates, he has been consistently poised and in control of whatever question they put to him, even putting the moderators in place on behalf of other candidates when they deliver the “gotcha” questions. He doesn’t act like he thinks he needs to show off (as Perry does), or like he feels the need to be constantly proving something (as Romney does.) He doesn’t endlessly come back to his “pet issue”, no matter what the question is, as do Bachman and Ron Paul–especially Ron Paul. I think he would secure the American border and do what’s right in our defense but without feeling the need to keep fighting endless unwinnable wars–as Santorum seems to feel.

He has been in business himself and has his own record of balancing the budget during the Clinton years to stand behind him. Since he was speaker of the house, he understands the procedures and the crappy way things work in DC (or don’t work) and he knows what it will take to turn the country around. I like his idea of using lean six sigma to clean up Washington. If he can get a congress to buy into that, a whole lot of political, money grubbing, regulation cranking organizations—like the dept of Education and the EPA–would have their doors closed. Most importantly, Gingrich believes that the Constitution is the rule of law and that the government needs to abide by it.

I’m not saying everyone needs to just categorically jump on board with him. What I am saying, is we may have a gold mine in our midst and we need to take the cap off and give him a chance to show us the real stuff so we can see for ourselves if he could be the real deal or if it is just fools’ gold.

ThoughtsjustoffCenter comment: I would absolutly love to see a "Bachmann - Cain" ticket; yet, I don't believe anyone is really giving them a chance because the media keeps trying to focus everyone on Perry or Romney. I've always liked Gingrch, though I'm not sure he can make it past his baggage. Although, why should the left care about it - they are all for the distruction of the family unit. But, Newt seems to have changed his ways in that respect.