I can't see myself voting for Gingrich and his 5 year mistress. It is just too much to ask. Blasting the questioner was a clever move but doesn't change the tawdriness of the issue. It is OB-esque.

My simple question is, can Gringrich realistically beat Obama. Frankly I blieve this is near impossible.

I think we need Romney to straighten out the country. He is a honest, moral person, and a excellent example of a christian. He cannot be bought by those in power. He is not as conservitive as I would like to see, however, we need consencious in the country, and I think he would be able to work better than forcing conservitism down the throats of the middle of the roaders, and leftists.

Although Newt won the day and turned the tables on the Media...I still don't see him beating Obama,I have a hard time voting for someone for President with weak morals...

I don't think Romney should be running as a Republican. He seems more of a Jon Corzine pro crony capitalism Democrat. Newt would be okay if Perot were still around to scare him straight. Santorum seems to be another big spending Republican. Ron Paul seems to be the only one talking about getting us out of debt and the failed socialist system.

If Newt would promise to get rid of Fannie and Freddie it would help. Or at least stop shoveling billions of borrowed money down that abyss. Make them stand on their own and repay the bailout of the last decade or so. Most of the problems we have now stem from Congress getting into the home mortgage business.

If we go by history we need an ultra liberal President and big spending crony capitalists leading Congress before we can balance the budget. Oh, and at least a 5% protest vote.

Maybe Ron Paul will get enough of a protest vote to make the ruling Parties balance the budget for an election cycle or two like Perot did.

Barry Payne, Titular Despot Emeritus

Scary isn't it. How much of our money do you reckon that he stole the last time that he was on the inside. Mitt romney is just another jerk on a power trip.

On Ron Paul, my observation is he is out of it. As we learn more about the specifics of his foreign policy beleifs, it becomes clear he's not the man. As a former USAF Veteran I would not want him as my Commander in Chief. His support from the military is dropping like a rock! The more we learn the more he drops, he very well could be the next man out!!

Gingrich can most definitely defeat Obama; it's a given that he'll mop the floor with obozo in ANY debate. Gingrich has put all his cards on the table; he has admitted his past and has sought and received reconciliation (through his church). He has the political know how to get this country back on the right track. He is not a poster boy for Wall Street, like Romney, and he's a person who will defend us, assist our allies, unlike Paul who has his head in the sand, or Santorum who just doesnt' have the experience necessary to lead this country. Gingrich has experience on the national level, he will not cow tow & bow to foreign powers. His past personal items are of no consequence when we are looking to save our country from total destruction by Obama and his regime. Romney can NOT defeat Obama, Gingrich WILL defeat him. We have to look past the personal background, we are all sinners, so who set us up as judge and jury???

Newt is just the kind of fiery persona we need. We are on to something if all the so-called experts are against him, including Krauthammer and Will.

Newt is the smartest guy in the room, he has converted to Catholicism and owned up to his sins of the flesh. I believe he will crush Obama in debates, and if Obama goes too far with Newt's marital issues, when will the main stream media investigate the gay trysts that Obama had in the past, on numerous occasions?

I ask you, WHEN?

Everybody has baggage, Newt no more so than anybody else. Santorum is irrelevant, and the more he tries to question Newt's capabilites as CIC, the more I dislike him. Talk about giving the liberals talking points if Newt wins the nomination. Romney is completely out of touch with practically everybody, and he's a terrible debater....never seems to be prepared and always seems to be taken by surprise. Newt can make mincemeat out of Obama....and he IS a Reagan conservative. Go Newt.

Newt all the way. America's Churchill.

The candidate who can defeat Obama is Romney. Newt has too much baggage to be elected by the middle. He may have wooed and wowed the conservatives of South Carolina, but that won't play well in the rest of the country.

Newt will be the republican candidate for he is the only one that can tear Obama to shreds. He has the knowledge and ability to get our country back on track.

I cannot believe people think Gingrich is anything other than a progressive, who idolizes FDR, took a job with Freddie Mac while they were taking down the housing market, worked with Pelosi on a global initiative, buys into the Algore global warming nonsense, supports amnesty, AND is morally bankrupt. WHY? Because he's a wordsmith, and can deliver inspiring speeches. Sounds a lot like Obama to me. And I have one word for those evangelicals in S.C. HYPOCRITE

If the people on the right REALLY WANT a Fiscally Responsible , Constitutionally abiding , Honest, intelligent, Military Veteran whos not been investigated for any moral or ethical violations. A man whos given back the unused portion of his congressional budget to the US Treasury for his over 20 years in Congress. A man whos written many books and at least 5 are on economics. A man who is not a Washington insider by ANY means.. Then there really is only one choice.. Dr. Ron Paul.. DONT listen to the media.. Go to his .gov website and read his speeches and the legislation he proposes. Check his voting record.. PLEASE DONT LISTEN TO THE MEDIA.. Thats if you actually hear them mention his name... WE NEED REAL CHANGE... NOW..

The base is itching for a fight with everything the Obama Democrats stand for and they don't much care who gives it to them, just as long as somebody does." --columnist Michael Walsh

Michael hit the nail on the head - we reject everything the Democrats stand for and anyone who plays their game we are against. I don't know who is going to win the Republican nomination, but it better be someone who is going to change the debate topics and starts paying homage to our Constitution.

Gingrich is obviously the one to take on obama and win. Romney on the other hand is fluff that obama will easily blow away and for good reason. Romney is unelectable as a Republican because he will never carry sufficient Conservative base that he would need in order to win. If Romney is nominated it will be a boon for the Constitutiion party. If Romney is nominated then it would serve as proof that Republicans did not really believe they could defeat obama. Romney would lose perhaps even by a larger margin than McCain in 2008. We need a leader and not a Flip Flopper. In addition Gov Christie has nullified any chance that I would vote for him in any future national contests. As far as I am concerned Christie is an embarrassment to the Republican party and should keep his big mouth shut. Christie is upset because he endorsed the wrong person. Dump the Flip Romney. Lets go GINGRICH/SANTORUM in November

I voted for the first time for Dwight Eisenhower, and have consistently and regularly voted Republican since.If Romney is the Republican candidate in this year's presidential election, I will sit out the election for the first time in my 80 years.He is a RINO and I will not knowingly assist in his further demolition of my country.

Hi,I have been with the Tea Party and the 912 project from the beginning. The only one that holds up to our standards is Ron Paul. We as a group should not listen to the media. We should gather against them. There are a lot of Dems.Independents,Rep,Constitutionalist that would vote for Ron Paul over any of the others. I will not vote for a rino. I will not vote for someone that I do not feel is right for or country, including Mitt. I say stand firm. I will write him in if I have to. If we do not do something all is going to be for not, and Obama will be e...lected again. I stand firm. on Ron Paul. Before I was leaning to Bacman or Perry. NOW it is RON PAUL ARE NOTHING FOR ME.

A response to a question asked if Ron Paul does not get it what would I do.

I told you, I am going to write him in. We the Tea Party are for bringing back the constitution he is the only one that will do that. I have said all along that the Tea Party would split and Obama will get in again. God is in control. IF he wants him out it will be so. I have to do what I think is right to do.God Bless America and all of us.

Pass on the word, not to let the media elect or next president we can all stand together and win. However we have to let all of the others Rep, Dem, Independents, Constitutiionalist know what we are doing. Please spread the word to all. Thanks

http://www.mittvsron.com/

30% of People Who Watch This Whole Presentation Change Their Vote

mittvsron.com

Newt Gingrich is as much a Conservative as I am a Martian. That is -- not at all.

If that Liar and Wife Cheater wins the nominiation.... I am perfectly content with 4 more years of Bama.

Newt does not deserve... Nor has he earned my vote.

Joe

All of them are New World Order insiders, with the exception of Dr. Ron Paul. If you don't believe that do some research. Newt has attended meetings at the Bohemian Grove, as have many of the elite since the 1930s. Both Bush Sr. and Jr. are regulars, Nixon attended, Clinton, anyone who has been in power for a very long time. There is really only 1 party, the idea of a Republican and Democrat system is just a distraction from the truth. And anyone who makes it into office does it on their ability to lie to the masses and get elected. If anyone other than Dr. Paul gets elected, say good bye to the USA and hello to your new One World Government dictator.

Newt & Mitt can now spend their time attacking each other while Ron Paul keeps preaching the message and winning converts .”FREEDOM BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER”

I live in South Carolina and I voted for Newt. As a conservative I want someone who can stand up to Obama and the national press. I agree with most of what Romney says but, he may be too much of a "Mr.Nice Guy" to handle Obama one on one. We did that last time with McCain !

The look of fear on the MSNBC "Forward Leaners" faces when they announced Newts victory in SC was, priceless.

Newt may be a good option, but one with lots of baggage, baggage that shows a lack of commitment.

Romney is Morman and therefore dilusional, believing he will be a God, equal or better then Christ Himself.

Santorum is a viable possibility, a relative newcomer to the arena.

Ron Paul is a little "out there", but has a good message, isolationistic though it may be. We coud acutally use some of that. I think though that realities may curb some of his isolationistic views but his core message is a good one.

One of the posters above made a statement that is an oxymoron. Romney and Honesty are two direct opposites. Romney is the most dishonest politician running for President this election cycle. Romney has no base principles and that is why he flips and flops like a clone of John Kerry. The very last thing this country needs is Flip Romney. Telling one story here and another story there is very dishonest. Look at his record because it is different than what he is saying. RINO romney must be defeated in the primary at all costs.

The left media will now close ranks behind Romney and justify his nomination over any other Republican candidate, just as they have done in the past. Unfortunately, the populace will read/hear the media's hype, believ it to be true and follow their lead like lemmings.

Truly unforunate, again.

Newt Gingrich has all the gifts of leadership – a magnificent debater with a quick mind. WHERE he will lead is the question. Speaker Gingrich can put that question to rest very simply by softening his arguments against Ron Paul in the coming debates. If Gingrich can assimilate Ron Paul’s philosophy of individual liberty, personal responsibility, free markets, small federal government, strong national defense, and states rights he will no longer be considered a loose-cannon and he will ultimately win over the majority of Paul’s supporters.

Of course Mitt Romney could do the same thing, with the same results. But I prefer Newt because he seems to have the gifts to beat Obama and change the direction of our government.

I like Newt & was VERY GLAD Mitt Romney did not win SC. He nearly bankrupt the state of MA with HIS healthcare bill.. Then Obama did a lot of copying that bill..

Mitt is NOT a job creator.. many jobs were LOST when he was the governor of MA..

Hope Newt wins BIG in FL too..

If Newt wins the primary he won't be able to pull in moderates, independents, blue dog democrats and dissatisfied ex- Obama supporters in the general election. End result is 4 more for Obama! So would you rather have Romney (75% conservative) in the white house or have Newt (90% conservative )win the primary only to lose to Obama? I am for who ever can bounce Obama and that is Romney!

Mitt Romney is no Christian. He is Morman. By deffination, he is a member of a cult.

A doctrine which elevates the believer to a status at or above Christ Himself, is a cult. Mitt Romney too believes he will be given his own planet to be God over.

Is this what you want for a president? A disillusionist? A cult member? I think not.

I live in SC, was very surprised at the outcome of the vote, am still totally uncertain as to whether any of the Republicans can win in Nov. so color me just plain sad.

there is not a chance in hell I would ever vote for newt gingrich. The republican party needs newt like we need the plague. He is disgusting southern white trash, that could never beat the garbage currently in the white house! I look at newt as the destroyer of the republican party. One can only hope Mitt hands him his ass in Florida. As for Santorum and Paul, both jas beens...should just go away and quit destroying the republican party. When I see newt I see poison to our party!!!!1

Newt Gingrich was forced to resign from congress because of ethics violations. Callista Gingrich had an affair with Newt knowing that he was a married man. Is that the type of people that we want leading our nation? Is that the type of people that we want our children looking up to? I believe that Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney would be a far better choice for President of the United States.

The numbers in this Washington Post link are interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mention-machine

If we can force ourselves to drain the media snot from brain, the People may have a chance in November.

Kobayashi/Maru

2012

It's a no win situation for the country, regardless of the candidate.

I don't see Gingrich getting the nomination because, let's face it, whether his second wife's accusation is true or not, it's completely consistent with what he actually did to both her and his first wife. He scored in S.C. because he managed to slap down both the media and the issue, but it won't go away. He has a reprehensible past, which includes a trail of conservatives willing to talk about how little of a conservative he actually was during his time as speaker -- before he was thrown out of that job. His only come back is "I'm not like that anymore." His nomination would be a huge gift to President Obama.

Sad but true. Most of the above commentators say the only person who can beat the sitting president is Romney and given how the GOP candidates are beating up on him, maybe not. Newt has one scandal to many and that won't play in the rest of the country.

I concur with editors comments. Yet is greed a symptom or the disease? "See: Health and Wealth Gospel."

I've read all the above comments and I've noted the plethora of them are saying, we are rudderless and none of the candidates uphold our ideals.

I've said this for years, extremism from either side is still extremism and we have a Congress that is so extreme they have a 8-13% approval rating. the reason is no one wants to do the will of the people. Last year our agendas was turned back or voted back in 134 states.

to the editors, I wasn't flippant when I asked, is greed the symptom or the disease for greed comes in many forms, I question if government on both sides is the disease.

Gingrich has already proven himself a traitor to the country and a sellout to the american people time and time again. Romney was born in a mormon colony in mexico and is no more eligable to be president than the usurper obama. Santorum shows time and time again he is a bankster patsy and his votes go to the highest bidder. Their is only one left andd your choice should be clear if you had two brain cells to rub together. The man is a cconstitutionalist with a long and proven track record. He has served his country well for his whole life. So quit crying about his beliefs in relation to foreign policy we all know that the realities of the oofice have a life of their own. We all know the system and business as usual establishment is broken and he is the only candidate standing up there again who knows it as well and is willing to change it Dr. Ron Paul has the medicine for what ails us and our country so you lemmings need to wake up and get with the program and not another MSM lamestream mediad two party false paradigm selection charade!

Although Newt Gingrich appears to have all the gifts of leadership and is magnificent debater with a quick mind, he is to much like the mold we have in OBAMA. Talk is cheap, past proven performance and deliverance in a economic field means more to me.

Newt was also involved with the Fanny May Problem and should have brought that problem up before it got to big. Was he asleep at the wheel or on the take from them? We have to win the White House first to move on to implementing more consevative programs.

Newt, also won't get the needed votes from Independents, Conservative Democrats or some Liberal Democrats to beat Obama, if he is the GOP canidate.

Herb Wardell

Darn it I hate these websites that screw around with your posts that they disagree with. There was nothing wrong with the spelling when I checked it before submitting it, but there are mistakes now.

Newt is not perfect !! Who among us is ?? So he is divorced and had an affair !! Big deal !! How many of out there have been down this same road ?? His ex wifes interview was an effort to foil his run for the presidency, IMHO.. Divorce is always a case of he said, she said, so let it go.. That's what the courts are for. WE NEED to Unite and support a candidate for President.. Remember the mission here is to remove Obama from office !! All it takes is votes !! ABBO - Any Body But Obama !!! Unless you want a totally Socialist/Communist Nation that is.. He will totally destroy this Country IF he gets another four years !!! Is that what ya'll want ??? Obama has a record of smoking "coke" and worse unspeakables not to mention he has NOT shown a legitimate birth certificate (all forgeries) blocked his educational records, has a Connecticut block S.S. number and never ever lived there and this list goes on and on.. Yet he got elected !! Republicans had best united and stop trashing their own candidates !!! Stop trashing each other. Vote Republican regardless of who it is to eliminate Obama from office.. I believe that an Obama vote is a vote of treason !!

Romny is said to be the one who can beat Obama, but Gingrich is the best debater. Why? Because when it comes to Constitutional issues and the Rule of Law, the fact that he is a historian makes him the best shot. The idea of seven Lincoln-Douglas style debates with Obama should give the latter cause for worry. I doubt, even with a teleprompter, he has the stamina for that scenario. At this point in time, the race is between Romny and Gingrich. The other two need to fall back to anotehr day. Their arguments sound like pie in the sky to many, but I doubt anyone wants a Libertarian, much less knows what one really is, and Santorum's arguments are fine, but not against Obama this time around. I'm going to wait and see what happens in Florida and beyond before I decide, but I know I will vote for whomever the Republican candidate is.

Well, that's the story of the mainstream media, Peggy. They are focused on all the wrong things and all the wrong stories. The media is not going to go after the one they are in bed with, now are they?

As Neal Boortz pointed out this morning, the reason the Donna Braziles and Valerie Jarrets of the world are so emphatically and contemptuously saying that a Gingrich nomination would be their favorite dream come true can only be that they are scared to death that Gingrich will wipe the floor with their Messiah. Romney looks better on paper, but in person he just doesn't deliver. Romney might well beat Obama if he honed a stronger and more aggressive message, but Newt is probably our best bet.

Ron Paul is a joke, and Rick Santorum is way to angry and hung up on abortion to be acceptable to "undecided," "independent" voters. Either of them would lose as badly as McGovern or Goldwater.

Newt is as much a businessman as Rmney is, and that is a good thing.

Newt brings the "historian's" perspective to world events and I am very confident that he will serve America well.

He is not as conservative as I would like, and he has been one of those "compromising , law making beaurocrats" that tend to give in to the democrat calls for "Bi-partisanship", but nowhere near as weak as McCain or even Lindsey Graham.

Newt will do fine --but we must WIN THE HOUSE and SENATE.

Congress can set the legislative agenda ( Newt proved that!) and President Gingrich will be held on a conservative course.

I suggest that folks go back and read or listen to Newt's speech when he was sworn in as speaker.. His story of the of the elderly Lithuanian man is very profound and demonstrates Newts understanding of what America is and how important our founding principles are.

I left Newt after the Bain comments, but now I am convinced he is the closest thing to a conservative we can get,, and I will work to make sure we have another conservative congressional victory to help him turn the ship around

I got an e-mail a few weeks ago that said something like ",,,and without teleprompters" it was Mr. Gingrich speaking of America, and patriotisim, I made up my mind then, support him to the very end, and point out to others that he has the zeal to make America listen. I do, I hope you will too.

We need a conservative who believes in American and is able to explain a plan of action, Party be damed. I would be more comfortable with Gingrich or Santorum over Romney.

Prayers

Mac

Newt was elected by his constituents 11 times and he served for a little more than 20 years in the Congress. 84 charges brought against him by Nancy Pelosi, 83 Dismissed, paid fine on ONE. The one he paid the fine on was for receiving up-front money from a book publisher, hardly a crime in my book. And being attacked by Pelosi and Willard Mitt Romney is a badge of honor. John Boehner who got what he wanted in 2010 now presides over a 12% Gallop congressional approval rating and an annual budget short fall of 1.3 trillion. Boehner in 1997 led the coup against Newt. When Newt stepped down from the Speakership as a result of being attacked by the RINO's, the Gallop approval rating for Congress was 42% approval. Newts approval as Speaker was better than any Speaker since, and we have not had a balanced budget since. In fact NEWT balanced the Federal Budget for 4 consecutive years!!! :) GO NEWT!!

I am a little disappointed in the Patriot Post by not having more press of Ron Paul. He is the only candidate that stands for our Liberties , and the Constitution, is it not what this website is about?

Again, another hypocritical website, another Republican/Democrat website, when these times call for a PRESIDENT of The Constitution, not a President of political denomination.

We cannot put Foreign Policy, Foreign Aid, foreign anything before OUR country, this Foreign Policy crap is for the UN and they can get some other country to step up to the plate, we need to send aid to our people for some years to come.

We are bankrupt, in a Depression, whether anyone want to believe it or not, we have millions without jobs, housing and food. I for one would love my tax money go to help the Unemployed , but despise the welfare (another twist of the Constitution) abuse in this country.

Our Government is WAY too big and needs to be CHOPPED in half, just like Dr. Ron Paul says.

You ask about the unemployed, well that's where the Foreign aid can go to help those fat on the government, when they are laid off. Get a real job where you have to earn your money, stop stealing our money.

People turn a cold shoulder to Ron Paul because the truth hurts, it hurts Democrats and Republicans, and those who choose to side with 'their' side, will watch this country crumble. This is our last chance to really bring a equilibrium to this country.

Your choice, a USSA in the dumps, or a USA on the right track, just like the Framers intended.

So come on Patriot Post, I have contributed and believed in this site, now I am a little sickened from the absence from its Constitutionality.

Does anyone know what Liberty is?

Kelly

How could the Republicans, facing a pathetically inept and vulnerable incumbent, give us the choice between Romney, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum. Dems have to be dancing in the streets. We are on the verge of snatching defeat from the mouth of victory. Our only hope is for a brokered convention that drafts Christie, Daniels or Paul Ryun.

Newt is my choice! Romney or Santorum, would be "OK". I could live with either. Ron Paul, ..... you're kidding of course? You are kidding, .... aren't you? Ron Paul, who would allow Iran a nuke, make marijuana, cocaine, and meth legal in America, gut the military, totally isolate the US from the rest of the world, says 9/11 was "America's fault", and will somehow do everything he wants to do, and all the while cutting the federal tax level to "zero" percent!

Get real! In 2012, ... ANYBODY BUT OBAMA OR RON PAUL!!!

D. Matthews, Tom H and Jay have it correct about Gingrich. Excuse me while I go puke as I just heard a republican mouth piece call Gingrich a conservative.

Newt has many of the qualities of our current POTUS. A good debater, a good deflector of opposing views, a good fabricator of tales. This is exactly why he is ahead in the polls. Apparently, that is what Americans like. Integrity doesn't matter as long as you can say things we like to hear, you'll get our vote. Everyone needs to read the book by Andy Andrews called "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" It is a non-partisan inquiry into how so many Jews lost their lives in WWII by Hitler's hand. How DID those Nazis do it? They lied to people and those Germans believed them, right up to the point where it was too late.

No more Newts!

As far as Newt winning against Obama. I think many of the readers are drinking the Left's Kool Aid. I think our top 3 can beat him. You have to realize it's going to be a street fight and nice guy's don't win. Romney keeps going toward the center, he needs to learn real quick how to be a Conserative.

So in my opinion, yes Newt can beat Obama. You better look at the last election. Talk about sorry, Clinton, Edwards, and Obama????

If Romney is our choice Obama and his marxist friends will paint him as a Wall Street insider. A 1% er. There is so much class warfare that even moderates take part in it. Obamanites have been setting all these protesters up for just this reason believing Mitt would be our nominee.

Even George Washington had faults. Serious faults, such as owning slaves. I will vote for anyone but Obama but I think Newt has enough fire to fight for America. I believe he can get things accomplished. I do wish they were all more like Ron Paul on everything except foreign affairs. I would even vote for him except he is off the charts on his world view. How we deal with other countries has serious consequences. Alan West would be an excellent President.

Newt can win, and win big. He originated the idea that about 70% of Americans, when given a clear choice on issues, choose the conservative solution rather than the liberal. Nobody can frame issues or think on his feet like Newt. Newt also knows how to torch the "news media" as the propaganda machine that it is, where other Republicans don't even mention it. Tens of millions of Americans would pay big money to see Newt debate Obama. Do you have any doubt who would win that debate? Newt will generate his own news, regardless of how sold out the "news media" is, and all Americans will listen closely. Newt assembled the first Republican House and Sentate majority in 40 years, corralled a very crafty Democrat president, balanced the budget, and rammed through welfare reform afer two previous vetoes. Only Reagan has accomplished as much for conservatism since Coolidge.

Gingrich's brain-power showed. And we need that now to combat the Progressives on all levels.

Go Newt!

Ultimately, I fear it doesn't matter. Gingrich is polarizing, Romney is going to be painted as the ultimate fat-cat one-percenter, and neither Paul nor Santorum has a snowball's chance in you know where. Whoever the Republican nominee is will get my vote, but I'm sorry to say it looks like four more years of BHO.

When I run for office someday, your team will be an integral part of my team FO-SHO! Thanks for keeping the torch lit!

Chief Rourke

1st Air Cavalry

Afghanistan

I won't vote for either Romney or Gingrich in the primary--both are big government Progressives. However, the damage either will cause the country will be less than the declared Marxist in Chief, Obama. As time moves on, more and more Americans are going to wake up to a country they no longer recognize, and we MAY be able to resurrect the US and our society. However, we need time. 4 more years of traitorous and criminal misconduct in the presidency will likely spell the end of our country forever. In the general election, like I have following Reagan, I will hold my nose and vote for ABO--Anyone But Obama.

I have a hard time hearing "Newt can't beat Obama" and repeatedly hearing his past brought up against him when he has openly admitted when he sinned and was wrong and has also openly repented to God for it too. Frankly, if God can forgive Newt, one would expect the rest of us could given Jesus Christ was CRUCIFIED for those sins in his and our place.

After four years of Obama one would expect any one could beat Obama! If you are looking for a "perfect" human being to run for political office, you will be waiting until Christ returns to rule over the Earth and I don't believe He will be running for office, it will be automatically His!

@Jay: Mitt Romney was born in Michigan. Detroit, I think, and raised in Bloomfield Hills. It was his father who was born in a Mormon colony in Mexico. There is a lot of misinformation out there.

My thinking is that if these candidates don't decide soon which of them has the best chance of defeating Obama, and then going all out for that person, we may end up with Ron Paul, who seems like a nice, but naive man. Especially about foreign policy. I wouldn't think he could debate Obama; he rambles. He also has a slim chance of defeating Obama in the election. Of course there is the chance that Obama will have a surprise in store for us as the time draws near; he is determined to win however dirty he needs to get. He may choose Oprah as a running mate...I know that sounds off the wall....but realistically speaking, a lot of people idolize her; a lot of people who allow themselves to be brainwashed by the times and what they are told is important. Phoniness. To answer the statement about who I think may have a chance from among those in the race for the nomination; I'm not thrilled with any of them, but Newt is direct when debating; I like that. I'm not impressed with the attempts to denigrate his competitors. However they all have been guilty of not behaving as gentlemen worthy of the office. Where are the statesmen? And why do I find it difficult to trust any of these people?

Ron Paul, Commander-in-Chief??

I like a lot of Ron Paul's ideas, including getting the Fed under control or eliminated, getting our debt and deficit under control, and restoring the liberty we had with the birth of our Constitution. Implementing all of these ideas will require the aid and assistance of the Congress, which I don’t believe he will receive.

Mr. Paul’s national security ideas are just plain scary, with many that are to the left of Mr. Obama. If he is a man of his words, he will close our foreign bases and bring home our military in ships that will be parked in America’s harbors. He will eliminate all foreign aid and pretty much leave Israel on an island in the Middle East (surrounded by people that wish them ill - death, to be exact). He will return the fight against terrorism to American courtrooms. And all of these ideas can be implemented without Congressional approval. The Congress can be an impediment to the growth of the military by controlling the budget, but how will that stop the President from spending less? Who will protect America’s interests abroad?

I think Newt will win the republican nomination only because he is the best to take on Barack Obama, not necessarily because he's the best among the pack. For liberty's sake we need to apply, or reinstate Ron Paul's beleifs of the constitution and bill of rights. We, as a nation are being forcefully dragged into a socialist type government, and we must fight very hard against the radical left to reclaim our great nation. We need to protect and defend our own nation, and quit worrying so much about other nations, they hate us anyway

Yes Gingrich done well!

And with his new fame, he is being attacked by the good ol' boy pub establishment candidates.

Now moderates (aka RINO's) republicans like those of Governor Christie is calling "Gingrich an embarrassment to the party."

With comments like that from moderate republican collectivists, if Newt gets the nod, he will have a difficult time beating Obama.

Governor Christie, how about tempering your criticism of a potential contender against our country's greater nemesis, Obama, and watch you don’t stick your foot in your mouth.

Of course, it seems you never had a problem with that.

@Paul

I beg you to stop the offensive language toward Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Since when does faith in God, the God that is the same yesterday, today and forever, equate to being delusional? Maybe in today's secular leaning society, but not in my world. To me faith in God means hope for a better world, it means a power greater than myself/ourselves is in charge and has a plan for His children. God will allow us to have our freedom to choose until the end, even if that means we choose to reject Him. But those choices have consequences. Faith is knowing the sun will rise. Faith is like a seed when planted, it will grow. "For it is by faith that miracles are wrought...wherefore if these things have ceased wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief and all is vain." Moroni 7:37

The fruit of any seed will tell the variety of the seed that was planted. By tasting the fruit and giving it a try one can easily tell if it is a good seed or bad. That is as close to the scientific method as it gets. God does not ask us to simply blindly believe. Any member of the LDS church, aka Mormon, will tell you that they have proven the test of faith and that it works! There is nothing delusional about true faith, there is something delusional however in thinking that just because someone says something in a national presidential debate, that it is true. Check the facts. There are ways to test and try your political hypothesis. By their fruits, ye shall know them.

I like Gingrich but do not think he can beat Obama. I 'm not that crazy about Romney but I don't the GOP has put any one else out there that can win.That leaves me having to go with Romney.

While I agree with the analogy Idaho Mom, when you get right down to it, we are dealing with alot of uninformed folks out there. going beyond that would be insulting, so I digress. But if you want an example just look at the Democrat base. But I wish the GOP would stop beating up on each other, Obama's past and present performance is a virtual treasure trove of stupidness and miscalculations. After reading tons of stuff on Obama, I am heartsick he is still in office. We're next down here in the Sunshine State.

Newt Gingrich's attack on Bain Capital was unconscionable. His arguments were incorrect and he gave the democrats plenty of ammunition against those of us who value freedom including free markets. Romney had to have paid the 35% tax and then the 15% tax. Ultimately everyone who is in the top 1% - so-called - pays most of the taxes in this country. Gingrich is a loose cannon who, while brilliant and a great speaker and debater, is a loose cannon who can't be trusted. Of those we have to choose from, Romney is the best bet.

Terence Jeffrey's comment about Newt's routing of the media needs to be taken further. As conservatives, our battle is not against the Dems, it is first and foremost against their mouthpiece, the mainstream media. Win the battle there, as Newt demonstrated and we win the war because the Dems have no substance on which to stand.

I am a little disappointed in the Patriot Post by not having more press of Ron Paul. He is the only candidate that stands for our Liberties , and the Constitution, is it not what this website is about?

Again, another hypocritical website, another Republican/Democrat website, when these times call for a PRESIDENT of The Constitution, not a President of political denomination.

We cannot put Foreign Policy, Foreign Aid, foreign anything before OUR country, this Foreign Policy crap is for the UN and they can get some other country to step up to the plate, we need to send aid to our people for some years to come.

We are bankrupt, in a Depression, whether anyone want to believe it or not, we have millions without jobs, housing and food. I for one would love my tax money go to help the Unemployed , but despise the welfare (another twist of the Constitution) abuse in this country.

Our Government is WAY too big and needs to be CHOPPED in half, just like Dr. Ron Paul says.

You ask about the unemployed, well that's where the Foreign aid can go to help those fat on the government, when they are laid off. Get a real job where you have to earn your money, stop stealing our money.

People turn a cold shoulder to Ron Paul because the truth hurts, it hurts Democrats and Republicans, and those who choose to side with 'their' side, will watch this country crumble. This is our last chance to really bring a equilibrium to this country.

Your choice, a USSA in the dumps, or a USA on the right track, just like the Framers intended.

So come on Patriot Post, I have contributed and believed in this site, now I am a little sickened from the absence from its Constitutionality.

Does anyone know what Liberty is?

Kelly

I'm glad that woman who was "caught in the act of adultery" was brought to Jesus and not to many in this crowd of commentors. She found not only mercy but also forgiveness and encouragement. Christ's words still condemn us: "He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone." Newt not only has repented and sought mercy and forgiveness, he is also endowed with knowledge and the spirit to turn our country around.

I am a little disappointed in the Patriot Post by not having more press of Ron Paul. He is the only candidate that stands for our Liberties , and the Constitution, is it not what this website is about?

Again, another hypocritical website, another Republican/Democrat website, when these times call for a PRESIDENT of The Constitution, not a President of political denomination.

We cannot put Foreign Policy, Foreign Aid, foreign anything before OUR country, this Foreign Policy crap is for the UN and they can get some other country to step up to the plate, we need to send aid to our people for some years to come.

We are bankrupt, in a Depression, whether anyone want to believe it or not, we have millions without jobs, housing and food. I for one would love my tax money go to help the Unemployed , but despise the welfare (another twist of the Constitution) abuse in this country.

Our Government is WAY too big and needs to be CHOPPED in half, just like Dr. Ron Paul says.

You ask about the unemployed, well that's where the Foreign aid can go to help those fat on the government, when they are laid off. Get a real job where you have to earn your money, stop stealing our money.

People turn a cold shoulder to Ron Paul because the truth hurts, it hurts Democrats and Republicans, and those who choose to side with 'their' side, will watch this country crumble. This is our last chance to really bring a equilibrium to this country.

Your choice, a USSA in the dumps, or a USA on the right track, just like the Framers intended.

So come on Patriot Post, I have contributed and believed in this site, now I am a little sickened from the absence from its Constitutionality.

Does anyone know what Liberty is?

Kelly

For all of you people who sit in judgement of a candidate because of their past sins I will merely repeat the words of Jesus... "Those of you who are without sin cast the first stone". Their past mistakes, how much money they do or do not make has no more to do with their potential to serve in office as your mistakes have to do with your fitness to vote - and I'm not talking about our Editor's comments about what is the SMART thing to do in the full disclosure of assets and taxes. That is sound advice. For the rest of you for whom the shoe fits, Just because we make and have made mistakes doesn't rob us of the ability to experience moments of clarity that allow us to be unselfish, see and do the right thing for the greater good.

For those of you who insist you will vote only for your candidate or not at all, you and people like you will be to blame for another 4 years of Obama and his stooges as they very intentionally and systematically destroy the Republic of our Forefathers. The current administration IS the clear and present danger to our country. ANY other candidate whose goal is NOT the destruction of the house our Founding Fathers built IS the best candidate! Get that through your heads now or forever shut your mouths as the USS America slips silently beneath the waves and into oblivion. The left, liberals, underachievers, those who don't want to work, those who don't share the vision of our Founding Fathers, the American Dream, our Constitution - THEY ARE NOT THE MAJORITY IN THIS GREAT LAND. We are! We simply have been too busy in our lives, too lazy, or too apathetic to vote and make the majority heard. Our heads have been buried in the sand or some other dark place for far too long! We are in our current predicament because WE didn't heed the warnings issued by the more wise among us, WE didn't believe the danger so clearly described, WE underestimated our opponents both in the media and the opposing party. WE CAN FIX THOSE MISTAKES NOW. But ONLY if we come together and form a united front to drive them out. They are like blood-sucking leaches, fat on the blood of hard working americans and American businesses everywhere. They will not go away easily, we will have to pry them and scrape them off of Capitol Hill, and it WILL be painful, it WILL be hard work and it WILL cost money. They are well funded, well organized and have much at stake - they will NOT rollover! They will lie, misrepresent, cheat, smear, steal, strong-arm, and ignore the will of the majority. America, our kids, our grandkids, can not afford for us, the guardians of the great gift passed to us by our Founding Fathers, to underestimate these thugs again. Let there be NO mistake, four more years and they WILL complete the foundation of an unprecedented power grab which will allow them to stay in power forever. The Constitution rendered impotent as a viable contract with the people, the checks and balances built into our branches of government forever bypassed and insitutionalized under the legal-eeze of precedent, the gates of our borders blown wide open to an ever expanding and illegal immigrant voting base and all the risks to our security that go with those unsecured borders. They will have finished the framework for a welfare system that rewards perpetual and exponentially growing generations of lazy Americans whose warped version of the American Dream is to be content with mediocrity and nursing at the gov't tit, modern slaves to their own slothfulness, and bought cheaply for the basics of food and shelter, free but substandard medical care and cable tv. THAT is not the American Dream I want for my kids or their kids. We MUST come together NOW, THIS YEAR or we will not only witness the end of the American Dream, WE WILL BE TO BLAME FOR IT! It is in our hands now to save it. Rally around whoever wins the Republican nomination and be known as the generation who SAVED the AMerican Dream, not the sad, apathetic shell of it's former great self that was too busy in-fighting to even notice our great land was under attack from within. As an Active Duty Military Officer I take my oath to defend our Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC very seriously. It is my fervant desire, great hope and prayer that we can remove this cancer attacking our Nation through the ballot box, but so help me God, if we can't it WILL be removed with another type of box. God Bless America, and may God bless each one of you with the clarity of mind, the wisdom, and the courage to do what is right for this great land HE has chosen fit to use as a blessing for the rest of the world - Amen.

Newt and Mitt are simply copies of Obama who will be blamed for the things Obama is doing, but gets a pass on, since it's fine for the Democrats to kill and maim and ignore the homeless, but as soon as a "conservative" is in power it becomes wrong again. Apply anything Obama has done to Bush and it would have been evil and right wing. When or if a neocon succeeds him, it will suddenly be bad again.

Newt, Mitt, and Obama are all the same creature. It doesn't matter who "wins". Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

A true return to constitutional rule is something now offered by Dr. Ron Paul. It probably won't happen BECAUSE of conservatives, who say he can't win, so they throw their weight behind big government scumbag politicians like Romnich. They will then cry foul about "values" and "traditions" when they realize they've been lied to again, or better yet, cheer as the policies of Obama, which were the policies of Bush, continue.

The past 10 years have done more to validate H. L. Mencken to me than any other time.

"The most important civil right of all is the right not to be murdered.” –columnist Wesley Pruden

"The right to life is the first right. Without its protection, no other rights matter.

The 14th Amendment states explicitly: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The Constitution is clear. The meaning is inconvenient."-Rick Santorum

"I have the ultimate economic solution. Declare people over 65 and the poor non-human non citizens."-me

When the right to life is not the most important concern in the election, there are no rights.

Romney once said, Wall Street and Main Street intersect when we are open to the free market. This is true. Staples is a perfect example. Government makes aliens out of both. We don't need anymore big government people in Washington with their grandiose ideas, insider connections and long political histories and secrets. Senators learn how to spend, Governors learn how to budget. So what if Gingrich can whop Obama in a debate - then what? I don't want to see the skeletons 1 billion dollars can parade out of the closet. Romney led at Bain Capital, he brought the Olympics back from corruption and saved our country huge embarrassment on the global stage, Governed Massachusetts well for a Conservative with an 85% democratic legislature and a 3:1 liberal constituency.(He was no Schwarzeneger) He is the turn around guy. We don't need to JUST beat Obama - we need to turn around the Country. Only Romney has the resume for that.

From my perspective Ron Paul is so superior to every one of the other candidates, in honesty, in Constitutional integrity, in financial clarity, that it will be a terrible loss for the US and the world if he doesn't come from behind and win.

We seem to be all over the map on critical issues, and not just these herein. But compared to us individuals, certain people, know best how to abuse and exploit information ... in a way that does extreme disservice to the whole. I draw the following insight from Mr. Sowells' parting sentence in 'Culture'

“…When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear." --economist Thomas Sowell

It strikes me that politicians today, and Media in particular, operate on this following negative credo:

Fides excaecat eos! Ignorantia cogit eos!

(Faith blinds them. Ignorance binds them.)BM

In the True Culture of America, I fear we really have lost our maturity and majority. A majority of Citizen American Patriots who will:

Listen intently. Assess critically. Take action decisively!

We are Not, "too stupid to understand". But one mans truth can easily be presented as anothers deceit. Surely, banging our collective head against the wall is doing damage - yet why are we so slow to stop?

Perhaps, we must individually to invoke critical choice; to understand whether our personal interests are:

- to help others (the good of all)

- or to help ourselves (for one, at expense of many)

Meanwhile, May We Please! have more truth, based on a full set of facts?

Haven't noticed any comments on why the Occupy movement has had such resonance. Perhaps I've missed them. But, I'm looking at the kind of mind set those who are behind the occupy movement (I won't dignify the name by capitalization)are trying to create in the gulible, general public's mind? In my mind,this shrewd tactic is trying to pit the rich Mitt Romney against the middle class and poor and being aimed so accurately at Obama's opposition. Those behind this phoney movement are fueling the embers of class warfare again and again. I believe this movement has been and is fueled by Mr. Soros, the unions and the democrats who are have planned this entire charade. Pretty brilliant strategic manuvering don't you agree?

"Tis said, in the military, there is no barometer more accurate than an enlisted person's initial assessment of an officer coming aboard. It rarely misses. Obama, for example, would likely not survive the mid-watch on an active American fighting vessel. That is the barometer I am viewing, seeking a leader. Right now, Mr. Gingrich is leading in that poll. Nearly every man who has been in the Oval Office has some shadows on his shirt tail; Truman; bankruptcy,Roosevelt,Kennedy; mistresses, even Reagan if one considers divorce. Catholic? Kennedy won anyway despite his "rounder" reputation. Clinton mowed everyone's grass on that issue! Thank you, Idaho Mom. LDS. There are many LDS folks, many dear friends, in my community. I have yet to meet one that inspires mistrust. The religious issue should be dropped. Has nothing to do with government. There is but one God, however we may view Him. Thank, also, Fritz. Quite so, 'twas the senior Romney, born in Mexico. No matter; McCain was born in Panama, of American (military) parents. Both are US citizens. Dr. Timm is, again, right on! Mr. Paul, for all his worthy values, and I respect him highly, does create disquiet with his isolationist comments. Mostly correct, only takes one or two for cracking the foundation. Not a leader, excellent supporter and cabinet person. Second the comment, ABO, anyone but Obama (or Sotero) I would vote for a caterpillar against that mischief! Speaking of citizenship-----? Semper Fi!

@Will in Phoenix, d rash

Let's examine the definition of DEFENSE and "interests abroad," shall we.

"We are friends of liberty everywhere, but guardians only of our own." These words are attributed to Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams.

No American was born owing a debt of treasure and blood to defend the rights of any nation other than our own. The only nations that would come to our aid in crisis are our English speaking cousins (UK, Australia, Canada)... and likewise, our willingness to spill blood and treasure for the freedom of others should be VERY limited. We cannot make anyone want liberty or be willing to fight for it; they have to fight for their own just as we do against our domestic enemies of liberty. It was Thomas Jefferson who wrote that should seek friendship and FAIR trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none.

This was the established policy of our Founding presidents and a wise one indeed. Our adventure into super-power status was arguably required to win the Cold War. The Founders rightly believed that no country in the world could conquer the U.S.A.... except us. Only Americans can conquer America and we're well on our way... on the way of the Romans. We simply cannot afford to be the world policeman. The U.S. spends more on its military than the next ten nations combined... very near 50% of the worlds expenditures on military. The U.S. Navy exceeds the firepower of the next 13 navies combined.

It's time for Japan, Germany, South Korea and the rest to pay for their own defense. As Patrick Buchanan points out, is it not absurd (or a symptom of senility) to borrow billions each year FROM China in order to defend Asia against China? Or to defend the rest of the world?

Ron Paul believes in a defense second to none. But for him DEFENSE is literally defense of America, not the maintenance of a world wide empire. We have over 716 bases in over 38 countries. We have U.S. troops stationed in 148 countries and 11 territories. Do we really need all those bases? Of course not. It's ridiculous to suggest we need them for "defense."

Does America have the right to say what Iran or Russia or any country has in their military arsenal? No. The military industrial complex has generated fear the minds of Americans to whip up a war fever to get another war started. Iran. Syria. North Korea. Any of these will do. Anything to keep the perpetual war machine going with more taxpayer dollars flowing down the insatiable budget hole.

It's ridiculous to believe that America can get its budget house in order without addressing BOTH its military spending AND its unfunded obligations for social security, Medicare, prescription drugs, etc. Unless we reduce our debt and deficit spending, we are committing financial suicide. Rhetoric about "America's Interests abroad" will be moot and meaningless when we are bankrupt and in anarchy at home.

Regarding the War on Drugs, it is equally ridiculous to claim that we are winning it or that it can be won. It took us just over a decade to figure out that Prohibition was a failure. Yet, we continue to pour money down the rathole in yet another failed war, the so-called war on drugs...and have continued it for three decades. To eliminate the profit motive for gangsters, drugs must be legalized and regulated like tobacco and alcohol. Deny history, economics and common sense if you wish, but the sooner we end this drug war, the better.

Just as no American has the "right" to the services or property of another in the form of welfare or Obamacare, likewise no foreigner has the right to the blood and treasure of Americans to defend them against their local tyrant.

If you believe in the Constitution and America's founding principles, then Ron Paul should be your candidate. Ron Paul is the only candidate with credible intent to pursue a return to the Rule of Law and Liberty. The others have track records that betray their status quo "establishment" bona fides.

Mr. Rourke, Sir! Well and most accurately said! One hundred and ten percent agreement and support. You are an officer I would follow---wherever you would lead!

If it comes to that, and I shudder that it might, I will pick up my rifle, and follow you. Thank you for the comments. No third party! Rally round the one selected, whomever that may be, and VOTE (FOR him).

Does anyone believe that serial adulterer, Newt Gingrich, really got a majority of evangelical votes in South Carolina? The same Newt who wants to take away our Constitution and replace it with a World Constitution? The same Newt who wants to disarm us and leave us at the mercy of this ungodly pack of thieves, perverts and traitors in DC? Newt, Mitt and Rick are all globalist elite war mongers. There is only one candidate who will even try to save this country and our economy, peace and prosperity, and promote sound money policy, and that is, of course, Dr. Ron Paul. God bless him.

SC voting has now gone 100% electronic, with no backup or paper trail. Election fraud was rampant in both Iowa and NH, to what extent we may never know. It seems "elections" have become mere entertainment for us dumbed down morons. The truly sad thing is that nobody seems to be outraged.

I believe the pressure has shifted to the nominating committee now, and i think if they are smart the nomination will go to Newt., people? say he can't win, you can bet Obama doesn't want to debate Newt, have any of you noticed how grey his[Obama's] hair has become in the last couple weeks, with all the pressure and the courts agreeing to hear the eligibility cases and i would be willing to bet there will surely be more states to join in. Praise God, the truth will set us free of this tyrant.

READ THIS:does not sound like Newt left in disgrace at all, rather the opposite!!!! Who is screwing whom here!!!

Gingrich Steps Down in Face of Rebellion

Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and his wife, Marianne, leave his Marietta, Ga., headquarters Friday. (AP)

By Guy Gugliotta and Juliet Eilperin

Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, November 7, 1998; Page A1

Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), the charismatic soul of the Republican Revolution whose members turned on him after unexpected losses in Tuesday's election, announced yesterday he will quit as speaker of the House.

His stunning exit came only hours after longtime friend Rep. Bob Livingston (R-La.) told reporters he intended to challenge Gingrich when House Republicans meet Nov. 18 to pick their leaders for the 106th Congress.

But the day's turmoil quickly produced more candidates for the speakership. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer (R-Tex.) and Small Business Committee Chairman James M. Talent (R-Mo.) pronounced their interest. Policy Committee Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) formally announced his candidacy on CNN's "Larry King Live."

For Gingrich, in Georgia all day, the end came early in the evening when spokeswoman Christina Martin emerged from the speaker's office with a brief statement for about 20 reporters gathered in a hallway next to the cavernous Capitol Rotunda.

"Today I have reached a difficult personal decision," the statement said. "The Republican conference needs to be unified, and it is time for me to move forward where I believe I still have a significant role to play for our country and our party."

Behind the sparse public words, however, was a party awash in recriminations. In a conference call with Republican colleagues, Gingrich talked about how "we need to purge the poisons from the system."

Faced with the narrowest House majority in 33 years, Gingrich bitterly denounced fellow Republicans who used him as a post-election whipping boy: "The ones you see on TV are hateful," he told members. "I am willing to lead, but I won't allow cannibalism."

Several members said Gingrich intended to resign from the House by year's end, and while Martin emphasized that he may serve for part of the next Congress, she said it is "unlikely he will fill out his full term."

It was a sudden and spectacular denouement for the onetime college professor and smart-mouthed backbencher who led his party in 1994 to a House majority for the first time in four decades, only to see his triumph, like his personal political fortunes, dwindle four years later.

Rep. Ron Packard (R-Calif.), who spent months lining up support for Livingston in the event that Gingrich would leave voluntarily, said the speaker had no choice in the end: "You can't lose the war over one general," Packard said. "Gingrich has won a lot of victories for us, but he lost one crucial battle and we can't risk losing the majority, which is the war, over one general."

Gingrich's decision topped a topsy-turvy day at the Capitol, which is usually darkened, closed and relatively silent in the immediate aftermath of elections. But the Republicans' unexpected Tuesday debacle, in which the party's already thin majority was trimmed by five seats, leaving the party with a 223 to 211 edge over the Democrats, triggered a rumble of rebellion from the GOP rank and file that grew steadily louder as the week passed.

By yesterday, it was deafening. The extraordinary day began with a news conference by Rep. Steve Largent (R-Okla.), who announced that he will try to unseat Majority Leader Richard K. Armey (Tex.). Largent likened Tuesday's elections to "hitting an iceberg." The "question," he added, "is whether we retain the crew of the Titanic or we look for some new leadership."

Then came Appropriations Committee Chairman Livingston's announcement a few hours later. And after Gingrich's exit was official, a knowledgeable Republican source said it was "highly likely" that Archer would join the race. Another likely contender was Talent, his spokeswoman said. Both will decide next week.

But Cox didn't wait. On live television, he formally announced his candidacy and pledged to work with all factions of the Congress to "produce spectacular legislation. We can find common ground on issues that are very important to the American people."

Armey issued a statement after Gingrich's announcement saying he would not seek the speakership, but was determined to keep his own post "to provide our conference with stability in managing the floor and developing legislation as we undergo this difficult transition." Earlier in the day he said, "I welcome the [party-wide] debate" that would accompany his own reelection race against Largent.

Armey, who helped spearhead the "Contract With America" that propelled Republicans to the House majority in 1994 and Gingrich to the speakership, called the Georgian "a fantastic visionary" who "transformed the House of Representatives."

And Livingston, who in announcing his own candidacy had referred to "Newt Gingrich, my dear friend," said in a statement last night that he was "terribly saddened that a man with such outstanding leadership ability and vision, a man who has cemented his place of greatness in American history, has ended this phase of a brilliant political career."

Democrats were stunned by the abrupt exit of their favorite enemy, but Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) viewed it as a vindication of sorts. "Newt Gingrich's resignation as speaker was the aftershock from last Tuesday's political earthquake," he said in a statement.

Although the GOP kept its majority, Gephardt said, "The American people sent a strong message that the Republican Congress was a failure. . . . The speaker's resignation is the reaction to that message."

President Clinton was more conciliatory: "Newt Gingrich has been a worthy adversary, leading the Republican Party to a majority in the House and joining me in a great national debate over how best to prepare America for the 21st century," Clinton said in a statement.

"Despite our profound differences, I appreciate those times we were able to work together in the national interest, especially Speaker Gingrich's strong support for America's continuing leadership for freedom, peace and prosperity in the world."

What remained unclear was the possible impact of the Gingrich resignation on the impeachment proceedings against the president. Some Clinton advisers believe it may not make much of a difference because the elections already appeared to have Republicans retreating to a more limited inquiry.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) signaled this week his interest in wrapping up the inquiry with few public hearings and little testimony, a course the Clinton camp expects him to follow regardless of who takes over as speaker. But without Gingrich involved, it may be harder for the White House to paint the hearings as a partisan witch hunt. And while White House officials appeared to greet Gingrich's resignation with muted short-term glee, there was also a measure of long-term dread that their favorite political villain was departing.

"We are mourning the loss of having Newt to kick around anymore," said one White House adviser who did not want to be named. "Newt Gingrich literally was the best thing the Democratic Party has had going for it since 1994. . . . If anything, there's total depression on my side of the fence."

Telephone lines buzzed all week as Republican members talked with one another, taking aim at Gingrich, Armey and Conference Chairman John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) as the most visible and vulnerable reasons for their straitened circumstances.

By yesterday, at least 12 Republicans had resolved after several conference calls not to vote for Gingrich under any circumstances when the full House in January meets to elect the speaker as its first order of business, several lawmakers said, meaning that he would not have enough votes for reelection.

"We have to have new leadership or we will not be in the majority in 2000," said Rep. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

Livingston, in Washington lining up support, was the lightning rod for insurgents. When he moved, others would follow.

But Livingston was a reluctant soldier. Gingrich, he told reporters yesterday, is a man "with whom I've worked closely over the last 20 years -- that speaker, that person is a dear friend of mine. And because of that, this has been the most difficult decision I have ever made in the past and probably will ever make in the future."

It was Largent, the conservative pro football Hall of Famer from Tulsa, who may have been the catalyst, flying to Washington Thursday to confer with Livingston after two days of discussing with colleagues his own prospects against Armey.

Some members suggested that Largent had come to Washington with a message for Livingston: If Livingston didn't want to challenge Gingrich, Largent would. Also, the members said, Largent was interested in forming a "slate" with Livingston.

But a source close to Largent characterized Largent's intentions as simply "interest in hearing what Mr. Livingston's plans were." Largent was committed to taking on Armey, a target of disgruntled conservatives for months.

Largent gave his news conference at 11 a.m. yesterday, apparently assuring himself of front-page coverage as the cocksure sophomore intent on taking out one of the House's biggest targets.

But as an often incendiary conservative, he took a measured approach, reaching out straightforwardly to colleagues: "What I believe desperately needs to take place is to heal the alienation that currently exists among members" of the House and Senate, he said.

At 2 p.m., a tight-lipped Livingston emerged from his Capitol offices, and with wife Bonnie and daughter Susie, strode across the cold, blustery plaza to address reporters. Livingston, who started the day on the phone negotiating with Gingrich in Georgia, called back later to let him know that, indeed, he planned to mount a challenge.

"We're at a crossroads . . . where we must choose between inspirational speeches and perspiration-filled achievement," he said. Livingston clearly favored perspiration: "History tells us that many of the most successful speakers of the past were more narrowly focused -- focused principally, if not exclusively, on the day-to-day business of the House of Representatives."

And he had been telephoning, too: "There are lots of members with whom I have not spoken," he said. "I cannot say that I have a majority. But I do believe that when the dust settles, that you'll see that I am the next speaker of the House."

At the speaker's office, Martin was talking tough. Gingrich, she said, had made 60 calls to colleagues since Wednesday, and 50 of them committed to vote for him for speaker. "I think he very well could have won this fight," she said, adding that the staff had started readying a battle plan during the day.

But Gingrich was beginning to have doubts: "He had a sense this may turn out to be a fight that wasn't worth winning in the end, because the next two years would turn out to be a very ungovernable situation," said former representative Robert Walker (R-Pa.), one of Gingrich's closest friends.

Gingrich spoke with his wife, Marianne, and made up his mind around 3:30 p.m., then organized a conference call with Walker, chief of staff Arne Christenson and former representative Vin Weber (R-Minn.). Walker, along with former Gingrich chief of staff Dan Meyer, had come to help Gingrich round up votes for his reelection. Walker soon learned that the script had changed: "He just laughed," Walker said, "and said to me he's going to join me in the private sector."

Gingrich then called Armey and drafted his public statement from his Georgia office. He organized a second conference call with local and Washington staffs, which took place at approximately 6:25 p.m. One knowledgeable source described Gingrich's tone as "fairly upbeat," thanking his staff for their work as he ticked off successes, including reforming welfare and balancing the budget."

Then he had a third conference call with lawmakers and friends, including elected members of the leadership and a few committee chairmen. And finally, he addressed the entire GOP membership in another call.

"The reception on the line was one of shock, of sadness," Martin said, noting that members and staff had the chance to offer their views during the calls. "Members were very choked up."

"Newt recognized that he had a problematic public persona, kind of a negative [persona]. And he said he was just not the person to lead at this time," said Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.).

Walker said Gingrich explained he realized that it would be "very difficult for the party as long as he was the issue. This was a totally selfless decision. Once again, he has proved he has the class to take responsibility."

At one point, according to one participant, a lawmaker remarked, "Newt, you led us out of the wilderness." Republican Party Chairman Jim Nicholson praised Gingrich as "the man singularly most responsible for us becoming the majority party."

"I love all of you," Gingrich replied. "Take care."

Staff writers Thomas B. Edsall, Ceci Connolly, Peter Baker and Spencer Hsu contributed to this report.

© Copyright The Washington Post Company

Back to the top

I think that Newt told the media, in a heartfelt way, that they were barking up the wrong tree. He called them out on their bias & that is what we wanted to hear. Go Newt go!!!

If you think our army's are the only thing keeping us safe, we have a lot more to fear! We can not afford to police the world without real income to fund even the most basic of services america needs.Dr. Ron Paul is the only one to keep our family's safe by keeping america strong and not putting us into a financial death spiral long live america and hope she stays free!!!

You know, the issue with Newt blasting the Lame-Stream-Media netting him a few lever-pulls in SC isn't the point. The LSM was right in asking Newt about his life and his character as evidenced by his actions. The LSM should be equally as tough on Obama asking him about his life, his birthplace, his U.S. citizen parents, his academic records, his financial transactions, his Constitutional qualification to be President, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum.

Steve says:

“Let's examine the definition of DEFENSE and "interests abroad," shall we.”

I have no issue with your argument that America is not obligated to “defend the rights of any nation other than our own.” And I believe our current financial condition makes it very difficult to pay for the costs of being the "world policeman.” But to say that defense stops at the borders of our country is a step too far. And the real question is can America afford not to defend its interests abroad.

We clearly have American economic interests all around the world in the form of global companies that are owned by American citizens (maybe even by your retirement fund). And what of the oil that powers our country?

Heritage Foundation did some simulations in 2007 to examine the economic implications flowing from an oil disruption in the Middle East. A one week disruption caused by closing the Strait of Hormuz was estimated to cause a $161 billion drop in GDP and a drop in real disposal personal income of $260 billion; That’s one week! The war game also predicted “massive spikes in oil prices” and the loss of one million jobs.

All of the rhetoric you cite is just that. What would President Paul do if the Iranians decided to close the Strait of Hormuz and all of our ships are anchored in American harbors and all of our foreign bases are all closed?

The utopian picture you paint of the way things ought to be in a perfect implementation of our Constitution is not the situation this country finds itself in today. Sticking your head in the sand and believing that radical jihadists want to live and let live, and that if we leave them alone they will leave us alone, is at best naive. This is what Ron Paul seems to be advocating. I don’t think we can afford a Commander-in-chief with this defense strategy.

I REALLY DON'T CARE WHO WINS THE REPUBLICAN PARTIES PRESIDENTAL CANDIDACY. WHAT I DO CARE ABOUT, AS DO MILLIONS OF OTHER TRADITIONAL AMERICAN CITIZENS, IS THE OUTSTER OF THE IGNORANT, ARROGANT, INCOMPETENT, DANGEROUS, DESTRUCTIVE AND HIGHLY UNQUALIFIED SHILL THAT PRESENTLY SITS HIS USELESS, BONEY, BACKSIDE IN THIS NATIONS WHITE HOUSE!!! AS LONG AS HE'S THROWN OUT LIKE LAST NIGHTS COLD MASHED POTATOES, I'D VOTE FOR "BOZO THE FREAKIN' CLOWN!!!"

J.J.B.Jr.(USN.RET.)

Maryland.

I, for one, am so glad to FINALLY see someone in the GOP take the media to task!!! I'm sick to death of the GOP playing "nice guy" and getting their teeth kicked in and their behinds handed to them on a silver platter. I say "GO NEWT"! Maybe the rest of the candidates will learn a thing or two from Newt. He WAS not my first choice for the GOP candidate, but I'm beginning to feel the "love" simply because he doesn't take anything off the media. He calls them what they are--BIASED!

Another thing, that's breaking the Governmentis,the Unionized Government worker, that makes upwards of Twice the Amount they should be paid, and AUTOMATIC RAISES, and don't have to worry abour being Fired or Laid-off, all kinds of emenities,Takes about Three persons to do what One could do very easily, each day.Fire Two Thirds of the Government Work Force (We dont' need them any way). And get the UNION OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT! And there you can save enough to pay medicare, and not cut the Old People short.,,,,Thanks

@Will in Phoenix

As America learned during the Barbary wars when we no longer had the protection of the British navy for our shipping, there's no substitute for a strong navy.

But again, the US Navy has more firepower that the next 13 navies combined. We have MORE than enough naval power to protect our shipping and commerce interests around the world. Iran knows that it cannot withstand our navy. They are making noise about Hormuz, but it's just that...bravado that everyone in the world knows they can't back up. Sure they can hurt us financially... but at what cost to their economy?

Ron Paul recognizes the US has financial interests outside our shores. So do I. We can cut our armed forces substantially including our navy and still have enough carriers to project power where needed to protect our interests.

What we don't need is to try to attempt to remake the middle east in our image... that will never work until and unless those people are willing to fight for their own liberty. The occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan has not produced viable democratic governments and neither would an invasion and occupation of Iran. To believe otherwise is to be, how did you put it...NAIVE.

Steve:

It is not so much about how powerful America’s Navy is at this point in time. It’s what Mr. Paul has implied he will do to reduce the influence of our Navy. With your latest comments we seem to have come full circle to my original comments:

Mr. Paul’s national security ideas are just plain scary, with many that are to the left of Mr. Obama. If he is a man of his words, he will close our foreign bases and bring home our military in ships that will be parked in America’s harbors. He will eliminate all foreign aid and pretty much leave Israel on an island in the Middle East (surrounded by people that wish them ill - death, to be exact). He will return the fight against terrorism to American courtrooms. And all of these ideas can be implemented without Congressional approval. The Congress can be an impediment to the growth of the military by controlling the budget, but how will that stop the President from spending less? Who will protect America’s interests abroad?”

So if Mr. Paul is not bringing all of the military home, I would argue he is giving me a misleading impression in the debates. His website is full of platitudes but not many specifics on which bases he will leave open and what the reach of our Navy will be. Where do I go to find his plans?

Mitt will win out! Love DG

Regarding Obama's recent axe job: I find it interesting that he feels "further environmental review" is necessary before he can approve the Keystone XL pipeline. Further environmental review? Isn't this the same man that brazenly foisted Obamacare on America without even reading it?!?! Remember Daniel Webster's warning: "There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." Is there any more unambiguous indication that Barak Obama's contempt for American independence and exceptionalism has real world consequences? The president who claims to be all about creating jobs--which is not really his job--has just killed thousands of jobs with an arrogant stroke of his pen. I don't know whether to laugh or cry! God save America . . . really!

If the four current contenders for the GOP nomination are the best the party can muster, I believe four more years of Obama to be a great probability; unfortunately. Certainly there is someone in the wings available to rescue the party and the nation. I believe no one should participate in the future primary elections until a VIABLE candidate appears.

While we are distractedly looking at the Republican candidates, President Obama is preaching rights for pregnant girls and, at the same time, clearing the way for further loss of freedom- parental rights are eroding. China tells parents how many children they may have. Chinese children attend school for 12 hours a day, while the parents work 12 hours a day. I would like to see a Parental Rights Amendment to protect our right to raise our children as we see fit, before we lose our rights all together.

Have you guys and gals ever thought of putting some of the Founders Daily Quotes in book Form? I would most certainly purchase one.

I am a conservative and I urge a vote for truly conservative VALUES. Don't just vote for the man that stands out, but vote for traditionally conservative VALUES. Don't NOT vote for a man trailing behind because you don't think he'll win. He may win with your vote. A voted vote is never a wasted vote, but a non-voted vote is always a wasted vote. Vote!

To d rash et all: allowing Iran a nuke? and how, pray tell, are you going to stop them? making drugs legal? and how well did the war on drugs work for us? as well as the war on poverty, or worse.

People here that are so incredulous about Ron Paul's suporters don't realize that they are against the Constitution. There is no power given to the State to regulate private drug use, or to impose upon other sovereign nations what they can and cannot do.

So, let me get this: we are all against an overreaching Gov, except when they happen to regulate what we agree with. Overstepping Gov is fine, as long as it oversteps over rights one doesn't agree with, is that it?

I guess this country and most of the "patriots" here need to lose their liberty completely, in order to realize where they went wrong.

Love him or hate him, in debate after debate,standing O, after stanging O, Newt has shown himself to be the only current candidate with the intellectual firepower, the political smarts, and the guts to stand up to and win against the Washington and the media elites. He's done it before, with four balanced budgets, and welfare reform even with a political master like Bill Clinton in the White House.

I'm back in Gingrich's camp after Hunt dropped out. I like many of Paul's ideas,, but neither he nor Romney can beat Obama. Newt has a chance.

I still grit when I think about his Speaker of the Hose demise, but Newt has grown and matured. And the more I think abouty it, the more I think we need a POTUS who can shake things up in Congress and get them off the dime. My support is for Newt.

Will in Phoenix:

Your points are well taken. Perhaps Paul is giving a misleading impression. I don't have any inside knowledge but take cues from Paul's various writings as I've followed him for some time. One overriding concept I take away is this: Paul plans to remain true to his authorized powers as President if elected, and IF elected he would remain true to the principles of liberty.

However, that said, he is not a zealot nor is he an unreasonable tyrant. He is an optimist and realist at the same time. He knows that many programs, agencies and offices of the government and the military took decades to build, and therefore he knows they cannot be dismantled or eliminated overnight. Orderly transitions should be expected.

Over and over, when asked "trick" questions intended to trip him up, he always responds with the truth ("I believe X..."), then states the obvious that such a major change (from Z to X) requires a transition, a reasonable plan to get from current state to where we should be.

HOW Large should our navy be? WHERE should they be deployed? What mixture of ships and weapons configurations?

Obviously, these are very large and COMPLEX questions with a lot of logistical implications. I believe that common sense requires that our navy be deployed first to guard our coasts, then to guard American trading vessels (and even foreign ships coming to/from the US)... that is, our critical shipping. Third, where are our current bases and troops deployed that need support from navy ships?

This site lists our ships and their home ports or forward deployed: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/ships/lists/shipalpha.asp

To the extent that a given foreign naval base (port) is slated for closure, then those ships must have another designated forward deployment port or home port. Obviously, some infrastructure will be needed in existing naval bases on US soil or US territories. All this obviously requires a LOT of input from various stake-holders at DoD. In some cases, where a foreign base is closed, a domestic base may have to be reopened in the US.

It's not reasonable to presume that all such detailed plans would be posted on a Presidential candidate's website. Once elected President, THEN he could order plans to be prepared.

So, it seems that you're terrified that bringing most of our troops home and curtailing the GROWTH of our military will leave us exposed to risks. Again, the sense I get is that Paul is VERY ATTUNED TO HISTORY and lessons of the past. He has stated that he believes in a DEFENSE that is second to none, but merely opposes undeclared wars with no clear objective or short-term path to victory. INDEFINITE and AMBIGUOUS plans are the worst way to deploy our military power. We need to have specific goals and plans for any war we undertake...always adjusting to circumstance, but NEVER with the idea that we will occupy and control a foreign nation for extended periods. That is not defense, it is empire-building.

Newt, without a doubt. He is seasoned, he is an historian, he is a true conservative, and he is definitely my choice. God bless him and God bless America.

Steve:

I have asked pointed questions about Ron Paul and you have responded in a calm and reasoned manner. You are a positive reflection on your candidate...

I hope whoever we elect in Nov will do a better job than the current administration has done of defending the Constitution.

I was not for Newt Gingrich in any way until he stood up for what he believed Monday evening beat Mitt in the mouth, now I believe he can beat the pants off Obama and that's what everyone is looking for, someone who can rid the USA of the likes of Obama Hussein and his likes having anything whatsoever to do with USA politics? I am one who wants Obama out of the USA'S government for ever. He had no business and no capability of running this country.Only his way.

We hope Newt.

I have a copy of the state of union from jan 24 2012

along with a comment thread that was on google circles where I believe Obama incriminated himself on what his powers were as president. I posted comments on the thread just tell me where to email it as an attachment.

How about a "Draft Daniels" mlovement? I likle his appearance an d what he said. I'd lkike to know more about this man and what he stands for.

I dislike all the bad remarks that are being made by the two leading candidates instead of giving me a positive plan for action that I can base my choices on. An d Idon't think the other candidates would have a chance of winning against Obama.

God Bless America and all those who serve to keep her free. Vote for less government at the National, State and local level. We must stop this in house fighting and form a strong united front. Newt has the best chance of bringing it all together. He gets my vote and support.

No wonder this country is in the mess it's in. Newt Gingrich???? You have to be kidding. Apparently you people want a debater not a president.

And you think he's a conservative? The guy's not even honorable...3 wives and a cheater, taking money from Fannie May/Freddie Mack, removed for ethics violations in the House, doesn't give straight answers to anything much, has been in DC for 40 years so a complete insider, has never run any businesses, and loves BIG government.

So what if he slams the news media and makes a show of everything.

YOU PEOPLE ARE NUTS. WAKE UP AMERICA. THIS GUY IS LIKE RUNNING MC CAIN AGAIN. AND WE KNOW HOW THAT TURNED OUT.

If I had my druthers, I'e druther have none of them.

But if I have to pick one, Santorum would be the choice.

I think Romney is just a "Wall Street fat cat" who will say anything he thinks the voters want to hear.

Newt does't have the moral character or the patience to be President.

Ron Paul is a nutcase.

Newt is a brilliant politician, who is wiser and more experienced then he was as speaker.

He has a PH.D in history and has written 25 books.

He is the right man at the right time to turn the country around.

It is my beleif that Romney has already topped out, and will be on a downhill slide from here on, his frosty second ammendment past and his Mormon religion coupled with his liberal past as Governor of Taxachuchetts will come back and bite him, especially in the Bible Belt and among Evangelical Chriatians.

Regardless of who get's the Republican Presidential Candidate vote, as long as barack hussein muhammad, his spouse and all his toadies get the ax!

Hell, I'd vote for Elmer Fudd if he got the nod!

J.J.B.Jr.(USN.RET.)

Maryland.