Don't forget he is a Council on Foreign Relations member. Lets see, Gingrich owes his allegiance to a foreign entity that wants to overthrow the U.S. Say isn't that the definition of treason?

The Republican Big Shots (you can't call them leaders) are trying to give us another Dole, Ford, Bush I & II, McCain, etc.

Open your eyes America, Gingrich is not the man to run against Obama. Excellent article, it really lays out who Gingrich is and will be if he is elected. He knows how to spin an interview or a debate and the media is really covering for him right now in their attempt to raise him up in place of Romney. There should be a sign around his neck, BEWARE.

The only consistent conservative running, that can be trusted and has a proven record as a fighter, is Michele Bachmann.

Gingrich follows his own ways ;his own thoughts and does not care what the Conservative Republicans think. He follows his own ways, whims and women. We already have a fellow in the White House who listens to no one besides his comarades: Alinsky, Ayers,Marx,Mao.Two Mister know it alls ? I prefer not.

Not a Tea Party favorite and not a favorite of mine. I prefer Bachmann -2012 ###

Glad you did this. The Newtster wrote some good outlines, but I'd overlooked his propensity to change and his opportunism to continue to plunder.

Michele Bachmann is the only candidate running with a squeaky clean record and crystal clear conservative message. She means what she says and says what she means. America needs her leadership and her integrity...

Conservative voters can only pick from the field of republicans willing to run for the job. The rest of us "know" what is best for the country but because of our own baggage, or some other excuse/reason, we will not run.

Republicans are Americas parents representing the matured of our country, the conservatives. Being a parent demands a certain toughness, a backbone, against the unrealistic wants of those who would prefer illusion to be the truth over accepting reality to be the truth.

It is easy for the child, the liberals, to love the golden man, the democrat, even if his golden nature is only skin deep, even if he in reality is the gilded golden man. It is difficult for the adult, the conservatives, to accept the parent, the republican, who is not perfection through and through.

Our culture has over time morphed into a fully enfranchized democracy. As such, individual voters must accept the inadvertent reality or consequence of a fully enfranchized democracy, as a voter one is voting as much or more against the other side as one is voting for ones own personal choice.

Be it meaningful coincidence or haphazard chance, it does not escape my attention that our America, originally concieved to be a republic, has evolved to be as much a democracy as it is a republic, and that further, these two words and their meanings have materialized as our two major parties. One, the republicans, from republic meaning the following of laws of the land, something adults, the matured follow. Two democracy meaning popular choice by the majority regardless of consequences, something more preferable to children, the immatured.

Some candy after a meal seems fine to me, candy as the meal sounds like trouble down the road. Vet our adult candidates yes, but back the choice because the children will back theirs, and we either continue eating candy as our meal or get back to the life sustaining nutrition our body needs. Thank you.

M.Bachman was never given much of a chance to respond to questions in the debates. I have seen her in action in a town hall meeting. She is, without question, the BEST OF THE BUNCH! She not only talks ... she listens. After all of the arrogance we've witnessed in the present administration, having her in the White House would be a breath of clean air.

M.Bachman was never given much of a chance to respond to questions in the debates. I have seen her in action in a town hall meeting. She is, without question, the BEST OF THE BUNCH! She not only talks ... she listens. After all of the arrogance we've witnessed in the present administration, having her in the White House would be a breath of clean air.

Since we can't seem to get 'all we want' in one candidate, perhaps we should be looking a the package deal.

Say for example, Bachmann/Cain.

Or perhaps, Cain/Gingrich.

Maybe, Romney/Paul

The permutations are many, but we must stop expecting to find the one candidate what will do it all. Let's face it, the complexity of the office and the circumstances argue for a team approach. I for one would love to hear the candidates tell us who they might like to see in certain key positions in their administration. Tell us now, how you plan to deal, via your cabinet appointments, with issues at State, Defense, Treasury.

Let's stop squabbling amongst each other over who did what, where, when and how, and speak to us of the future! Tell us about the first 100 days! Tell us what you plan to do to eliminate unconstitutional federal agencies. Address the meaningful aspects of your Presidency, and stop playing the media/dumbocrat game of gotcha!

As PDK says, "Thank you!"

Ms Charen is all too typical of those who are ready and willing to do a hatchet job on whoever is the front runner at any particular point in time. Bachmann is my ideal candidate philosophy wise. However; she is not going to be the Republican candidate who is chosen to represent us in the end. What Ms Charen overlooks is the fact that the president is not the one who actually runs the country. If we can elect a Republican president and Republican congress we will have a much better outcome. In spite of his baggage, I still like Newt. We need to look at his good points instead of his previous mistakes. I feel that he has matured in many ways, and has the backbone to do what is right in the end run.

Richard Ryan

Lamar,Missouri - Birthplace of Harry S Truman

Newt is not perfect, but is, I think, electable. He will go to battle with Obama, he will not let Obama walk all over him and play nice, ala McCain.

Many of Clinton's successes can be attributed to Newt, balancing the budget for one -- which is something we desperately need right now.

Personally, I believe that Gingrich has too much baggage to be elected; but I will support him if he is nominated, in order to oust Obama.

Let's not fool ourselves, for it was not Newt Gingrich who shut the Government down in 1995; It was really Bill Clinton, who vetoed the funding legislation at least three times. Gingrich also should not have allowed himself to be forced out of the leadership position. That made him look like a quitter. When he complained about Bill Clinton's broken promise, he allowed the media to portray him as a whiner. Newt fell into the trap which was deliberately set for him by Clinton; if anyone knew that Clinton was and is a consummate liar, Gingrich should have known, and avoided the trap by keeping quiet.

With Newt Gingrich as our nominee, we will be getting a mixed bag: frequently he has been let his liberal ideas have precedence over his conservative ones.

Our dilemma is that we are looking for a human being to restore constitutional government, and no mere mortal politician is ever going to be consistently on-track. While I agree that it is important to get a good candidate to defeat Obama, we must go deeper than just getting rid of this incompetent ideologue. Politicians will be politicians, and electing a Republican in 2012 will not guarantee the return of the leftists in the future.

Therefore, we must also restore the original constitutional limits on the federal government to the Constitution itself. Given the deep entrenchment of the Supreme Court decisions allowing the federal government's unconstitutional expansion since the New Deal, and the political class's support of that expansion, the only tool we have is constitutional amendments restating those original limits.

Of course, such amendments would never be enacted by Congress. Therefore, we need to eliminate the cumbersome and unnecessary convention requirement which currently prevents thee states from initiating constitutional amendments so that we can restore the limits on the federal government without having to go through Washington. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com