Thursday, December 29, 2011


Seriously, What Are They Smoking In Iowa?

A cogent, though sometimes weak, argument can be made for just about any of the Republican candidates in the Iowa race EXCEPT Ron Paul.  Yet astonishingly, the latest Iowa polls show Paul in the lead – REALLY?!!  Is there something in the water?  Have they mixed marijuana in with burning corn?  Are they kidding……? 

Now as a northeasterner I admit to very little experience with the Midwest, though I did work in Kansas for awhile and the people there seemed pretty normal.   So I am at a loss to explain (or mentally justify) how ANYONE could be supporting Ron Paul – much less have him leading in the polls.  Help me through this – they know they are electing the person they feel is best equipped to both beat Barak Obama AND be President of The United States, right?  Ok, so maybe they can ignore the fact that Ron Paul believes that Iran having a nuclear weapon is irrelevant (Obama seems to believe that too).  Maybe than can ignore the fact that Ron Paul gives credence to those who believe that 9/11 may have been a CIA plot.  Let’s say we can even ignore the fact that Paul has publicly stated that he would, as POTUS,  pardon all non-violent drug dealers and pimps.  Let’s even assume that publicly stating that Israel should not exist does not make him an anti-Semite (nor does the fact that he would not have intervened in the Holocaust, nor would he help defend Israel from attack).  Let’s even ignore that in 35 years in Congress he has not passed a single major piece of legislation.  Let’s leave all those trivial things aside for the moment. 

Iowa is saying that they want a man with Ron Paul’s racist background to be the Republican standard bearer against this nation’s first black President.  Now folks, here is what has been written under Ron Paul’s name (I do not say written by Ron Paul because he denies having written these statements despite the fact that they went out under his name, he profited from them for 10 years to the tune of millions of dollars, and he will not identify who did write them):

“The criminals who terrorized our cities — in riots and on every non-riot day — are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are.” - Ron Paul

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began.”- Ron Paul

“If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”- Ron Paul

“even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense, for the animals are coming.” – Ron Paul

In the 1990s, he described Dr. King as a

  “world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and “seduced underage girls and boys.”

He even claimed – without a hint of proof – that Dr. King “made a pass at” fellow civil rights warrior Ralph Abernathy, who succeeded King as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference

With regard to the passage of a national holiday for Dr. King, Paul commented:

“What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!” He added, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”-Ron Paul

It is absolutely irrelevant whether one believes Ron Paul wrote these things or not (though it seriously strains credulity to believe that over the course of 10 years he had no knowledge of these writings).  It is equally irrelevant whether one believes that Ron Paul was ever or is currently a racist.  What IS important is that a man with this demonstrably racist past cannot be set up to run against our country’s first black President.  The issue in such a campaign would most certainly not be the President’s record in office, but rather, whether or not we are a racist nation.  I submit with great confidence that Ron Paul could not win a single state vs. Barak Obama yet Iowa wants him for the Republican nominee??!!! 

So what goes on here?  Are we to assume that Iowans are so stupid that they can be easily manipulated  by Ron Paul’s legion of mind-numbed robots?   Is the entire state filled with white supremacists?  Are the cows responding to the polls?  One thing is for certain, if Iowa elects Ron Paul, the country will recover but Iowa will never regain any prominence in another election and John Huntsman’s comment about them “picking corn in Iowa and Presidents in New Hampshire,” will be prophetic.

The other day there was an internet rumor going around that one of the candidates asked, “what the hell is going on in Iowa, are they crazy?  Lights on nobody home?”  This rumor could not be confirmed so it was probably just a rumor, but even so, if Iowa elects Paul – it will be absolutely true.    

Thursday, December 15, 2011


OK - Hell is hot, the food is bad, and the neighbors aren't friendly.  It's kind of like Florida without air conditioning, right?  (just kidding Floridians - SHEESH!).  It's no worse than what Newt Gingrich is going through now, right?!  I only ask because I know I'm going there for the things I am unrepentently thinking about the Republican punditacrocy, the Republican establishment and the Iowa electorate.

The pundits would have us believe that Mitt Romney is the only person in the universe who can beat Barak Obama and lead the Republican party.  The former is just false, but the latter may be true (which is a sorry statement for the Party).  Let's see, Donald Trump is not good enough because he speaks his mind, has funny hair, and takes no prisoners.  Rick Perry is not smart enough despite the fact that he is a very successful governor of one of the most successful conservative states in the country.  Herman Cain is not smart enough and  always wants to have sex with white bimbos (you know those black men).  Newt Gingrich, well I guess they concede he's not dumb.  But you know, he may be too smart.  He has too many ideas.  He is also way too outspoken and he seems to like women also (is he  a black man too?!). 

Mitt Romney on the other hand, has led a perfect life (just ask him).  He never makes mistakes, he is always reserve and truthful (except when he is making $10,000 bets and lying through his teeth).  He is a true leader on all sides of every issue and has the impeccable conservative credentials of having been governor of the most liberal state in the union, having run to the left of Ted Kennedy in a senatorial election, and having given his state the equivalent of Obamacare.  This is the man who must be the Republican standard bearer - no one else will do.  The pundicrats tell us that Newt is a "baaaad" man.  He may have done a fews trifling things like having swept Republicans to power for the first time in forty years; having balanced four federal budgets in a row; reforming welfare; presiding over an unemployment rate under 5%, and an economy which created 11 million jobs; but these things pale in comparison to the fact that 34 years ago, he had a troubled marriage.  It is very important that the pundits are able to help us keep the proper perspective on this.  It is really not important that some pundits call Newt progressive; some call him moderate; and others call him ultra conservative - What IS important is that it is just not his turn to run for President and he is really upsetting the apple cart.  It is Mitt Romney's turn (you know, just like it was Bob Dole's turn, and John McCains's turn - fair is fair, afterall).

The pundits are not without support for their position - just ask the Republican establishment elite.  They HATE Newt.  The extremely popular Republican Congressional crew (9% approval rating) all tell us that Newt will bring all their good work to a halt (you know, like keeping the debt just under $25 T in ten years).  The anti-Newt Republican luminaries are legion and formidable like Dan (I can't spell potato) Quayle and Bill ( I resigned in disgrace because I'm a compulsive gambler) Bennet.  Bennet (who is, of course always the smartest guy in the room) informs us that Newt is bad because he has to be the smartest guy in the room (no jealously here though).

And then there are the Iowans.  They have now assured us that we will NEVER be rid of negative ads.  Paul and Romney have now spent $9M on negative advertising and the Iowans are sucking it up like vacuum cleaners on QVC (the shopping channel).  A supposedly Christian state which is being swayed by lies and deceit.  A state where some evangelical pastors have come out and condemned Newt for marriage infidelity despite his repentance, yet have no problem with Romney believing that Satan and Jesus are brothers.   

The things I think about these people are not fit for print.  There are times I want to wash my head out with soap.  So, no doubt about it - I AM GOING TO HELL.  The only consolation, is that I know all these idiots are coming with me so I can torment them for eternity. . 

Friday, December 9, 2011

Dad's Coming Home


Newt’s Code is “Cheerful Persistence” and “Stay Positive,” but this post will view that as more of a “guideline” than a rule (…Parley??!!).

To say that the long knives have come out for Newt is like saying that brain surgery requires a little medical training. These people aren’t just throwing crap against the wall, they’re using bulldozers. It’s good though, because Newt’s Republican rivals only have about 30 million dollars between them with which to trash Newt. Obama will have nearly a billion. So, as they say, whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. Suffice to say that Newt will be VERY strong after this ordeal.

With Cain supporters coming over to Newt, it’s time for Newt to adopt his own number “9” strategy: “NO 9, NO 9, NO 9.” Note that virtually all of the Washington beltway crowd has come out in favor of Romney. This includes the Republican Congress which has an approval rating of 9%. All of the pundits are just shocked that everyone in Congress who was around during the Clinton years and the Bush years is deathly afraid of Newt returning to Washington. These Washington insiders are like spoiled college kids with their parents credit card who suddenly find out that Dad’s coming home and he is not happy.

Seriously, listen to the criticisms – Newt was mean; Newt was bossy; Newt didn’t listen; Newt had a temper; Newt always had to have his own way; Newt was a bad leader; we HATE Newt; and on and on. Now just what teenager hasn’t said all these things about their own dad at one time or another? So, the 9 percenters are now quaking in their boots because they might have to deal with a man they can’t control or befuddle. I liked GW Bush, but it is plain that he relied far too heavily on the Karl Rove types who are now clamoring for Romney. And why do these folks want Romney? Because they see it as a third term of Bush. Romney is a go-along-to-get-along guy.

Of course the 9 percenters claim to be very concerned not for themselves (oh no, how could we even think that?!), but because Romney is far more electable than Newt. These are the same wizards of smart who gave us John McCain (The Lord of Eisengard). The energy in the Republican party is NOT among the establishment types. It is with the Tea Party and grassroots types who handed some power back to the Republicans in the midterms. These 9 percenters now have the gall to think that they can dictate to the grassroots who our candidate will be and that we will put them back into power so they can conduct business as usual. THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

First, everyone understands that the myth of Romney electability is just that – A MYTH. Romney will almost certainly lose as many votes through lack of party enthusiasm as he might pick up among independents. Second, Newt is doing well among independents and will continue to rise in those polls as his message continues to resonate. Third, Romney has been running for President for the last 5 years. The Obama team is ready and virtually salivating for a Romney nomination. The plan is obvious: engage in class warfare to demonize Wall St. and the rich; Identify Romney as a Rich fat cat; wrap Romney in the “1%” blanket and throw him in the fire of alleged Mormon racism. Add to that Romney care, liberal media bias, and a milk toast personality and goodbye Mr. Romney, Obama just ate your lunch!!

Newt on the other hand is a different story. Newt’s transgressions are old and out in the open and people just don’t care about the garbage. When they get past the garbage, they find in Newt a substantial battle hardened political veteran with real accomplishments, not a rehearsed, engineered, professional candidate with great hair, shallow knowledge and tantalizing promises for everyone.

Even better, they find in Newt a man who will not hide and try to take the Presidency by default. Newt will take the battle to Obama and restore our nation’s pride and vigor. He will invigorate the base, give confidence to independents, and reawaken Reagan democrats. People recognize Romney for what he is – all smoke. We want the FIRE!! GO NEWT.

Sunday, December 4, 2011


For all but hardcore political junkies, last night’s Huckabee debate was a non-event. To the engaged but casual observer, everyone comported themselves well and there were no major flubs. To those folks, the forum probably served simply to reinforce their existing preferences. To the heavily addicted among us however, the picture was quite different. Those of us wearing our politically microscopic lenses saw two candidates (Newt and Mitt) well ahead of the crowd; two candidates who were the crowd (Bachmann and Santorum); One candidate struggling to keep up with the crowd (Perry) and one candidate running around asking, “Where’s the crowd?!” (Ron Paul).


After Romney’s disastrous interview with Brett Baier, I wondered if he would hold up to the strain of being questioned individually by three lawyers. He did, although the questioners were not nearly as persistent in their follow-ups as was Brett. Romney has a Presidential bearing and we now know that he can speak intelligently for a full eleven minutes divided between several different topics. He remains Newt’s most formidable competitor. Newt was Newt: crisp, direct, knowledgeable, unflappable. Newt’s performances have been so steady that if he ever does have a bad day, it won’t go unnoticed.


Bachmann (whose rabid dog tendencies were kept in check by the non-attack format) came across well although she had a tendency to answer questions that weren’t asked and avoided answering those that were. Santorum gave the impression that he would govern from a pulpit. Whether or not one agrees that there should be a temporary truce on social issues, a Republican candidate in this environment who comes across like he is more interested in making you go to church than fixing the economy simply stands NO CHANCE in the general election. These two came across as competent but more campaign than substance. It is interesting that both these candidates have little to recommend them by way of their background and accomplishments, yet they are able to play up their achievements to best advantage. Perry on the other hand, a man with outstanding credentials, gets no respect at all for his achievements in Texas.


Watching Perry was just painful. He is so pretty that you want him to do well, and he seems like a really nice guy! But he went from being clueless on some questions (by what authority can an Executive Order override enacted legislation?) to once again flailing about for a winning message (part-time Congress), to also supplying answers to questions that had no relationship to the ones he had been asked. His halting style also does not instill confidence. Perry needs to give his money to Newt and go back to Texas with the understanding that he has reached his level of incompetence.

In what should have been Ron Paul’s night to shine (a forum on the Constitution and the 10th Amendment), Paul came across as confused and rambling. Answers that contain the phrase (“. . .and all that stuff,” are not awe inspiring). With all the “fake eyebrow” controversy swirling around Paul, it did look like those brows of his were dancing on his face. The right one in particular looked almost vertical most of the time. Odd.

All the remaining candidates will hold on through Iowa. My guess is that after Iowa we pair down to three candidates plus Ron Paul (who will hang in through the convention). Santorum and Perry will see the writing after Iowa although Perry’s money may keep him in a while longer (as will Bachmann’s ego) in the hope that Newt falters. After Iowa however, it should come down to Newt v. Romney in a spirited race. Romney is not at all likely to roll over (Particularly with proportional distribution of delegates until April). Perhaps after Iowa, however, the candidates can breach the confines of these 3-minute-per-topic forums and show the actual depth of their understanding of the issues and their intention for addressing them.

I have to believe Newt wins that contest.

Friday, December 2, 2011

NEWT v. not-NEWT

The stars aligned last night and the morning is brighter for it. Newt Gingrich is the GOP frontrunner. No more the not-Romney candidate, last night, by all accounts the media (and Newt himself) proclaimed Newt the man to beat.


To most Americans, the world has been out of kilter since Obama was elected. The reason is simple; we are a center right country being governed by a far left zealot. For the two years that Obama and his far left Congress were in charge of everything (including the toilet paper), Americans felt like they had been walking in two left shoes. It just didn’t feel right and America made that very clear in the 2010 election.


In much the same way, the Republican Party has also been out of kilter. The party is center-right to right on the political spectrum, yet the presumptive nominee can be most credibly described as being somewhere between center-left and center-right on the same scale (the very concept of a “conservative former governor of Massachusetts” is oxymoronic on its face) . This is why the establishment anointed, presumptive nominee (Romney) has only been able to capture 20-25% of the party vote – he does not stand politically with the majority of the Party, yet somehow the party faithful were told he will be the nominee. The great news is that Republicans aren’t buying it. The pundits and beltway types are just astounded (and peeved) that the grassroots of the Republican party have not bowed to the superior intellect and political savvy of the Republican elite (you know, the wisdom that brought us John McCain, Bob Dole, and Both Bushes and warned us against Reagan). With Gingrich as the frontrunner, the party is now in balance. Newt is somewhere between center right and right on the political spectrum. Although some like to claim that Newt is not conservative, his 90% ACU rating over the course of a 50 year career in public and private life plainly belies any such assertion. Left to right, the Party hopefuls now line up as follows: Huntsman; Romney; Newt; Perry; Bachmann/Santorum (interchangeably). To fit Ron Paul on this line, you would have to bend the line into a circle and place Paul in the gap between the far left and the far right (the loon zone). With Gingrich as the frontrunner, the party is in balance with Newt occupying the same political position as the majority of the party (somewhere between center-right and Right). Even better news is that this position, center-right, is also occupied by the vast majority of the country.


Who will be the not-Newt candidate? In terms of the base, the not-Newt candidate should come from Newt’s right (not his left). Tea party and hard line conservatives outnumber left-center to right-center Republicans by a wide margin. The real and logical battleground in the Republican Party should be between center right and right, not between center-left and center-right (in which a center-left victory leaves three quarters of the party dissatisfied and depressed). So, very interestingly, the logical not-Newt candidate is not Romney but rather Perry or Bachmann/Santorum. Newt now faces a daunting task, he must overcome well-funded political opponents on both his left and his right. Neither Perry nor Romney could credibly debate Newt one-on-one. However, debates are only a single aspect of the political process. Good funding means professional organization and a high media profile. The team with the best talent doesn’t win the game if it can’t execute. Newt supporters (and Newt himself) are justified in feeling a sense of accomplishment at Newt’s rise. But everyone should remember that it doesn’t mean much to be in first place at the beginning of the season.

Thursday, December 1, 2011


The media is “chompin’ at the bit” for evidence that Newt Gingrich’s surge is just another flash-in-the-pan. You can almost feel them waiting to pounce on the impending Newt implosion. It’s not going to happen.

Unlike his front runner predecessors, Newt is not a cotton candy candidate (real sweet but mostly air). Newt’s popularity is based on substance. Newt won’t trip because he can’t. One need only study the candidates briefly to see the huge difference between Newt and the other candidates. Newt is running as himself, the others are all running as who they think they “ought” to be. It is easy to “step in it” or get tripped up when you’re just pretending to be something you are not, but you can’t NOT be yourself for any period of time without stumbling. When you’re running as yourself, the only way to trip is to try to be what you’re not – I don’t see Newt going down that road.

Newt is running as himself and the country likes what they see. All Newt needs to do to continue to consolidate his dominance is to keep being Newt (how hard is that?). Some say that Newt being Newt is exactly what will trip him up, but this is wrong headed. Newt is no longer the fire-breathing, take-no-prisoners, damn-the-torpedos-full-speed-ahead, guy he was (and needed to be) when he rose to be Speaker of the House. No one at 68 years old is the same person they were at 38. There can be no doubt that Newt’s type A personality remains. However, age, faith, and grandchildren have tempered his judgment, demeanor and outlook. He is now truly a vintaged wine.

In contrast, Michelle Bachman entered the primary race as an energetic fresh face, tea party supporter, with a reasonable ability to articulate and connect with people. She had the additional novelty of being a woman running for President. She touted a conservative background and a firebrand, go-it-alone if necessary, style that is desperately craved by a conservative base which has had its fill of milk toast candidates (I give you John McCain and Mitt Romney). She announced her candidacy and shortly thereafter won the Iowa straw poll, giving her a boost and sending Tim Pawlenty packing.

Herman Cain had the appeal of being a black conservative. Whether conservatives want to admit it or not, being black was helpful to Herman Cain, because embracing a like-thinking black man had the additional advantage of dispelling the racism myth. So along comes Herman Cain, a charming, conservative man with reasonably good business credentials (who happens to be black) and conservatives jump on the Cain Train.

Then came Perry. The buzz surrounding Perry’s entry to the campaign was deafening, at least in part because Cain and Bachmann seemed to lack the strong background credentials needed for a Presidential candidate. In Perry we had a Governor of a large, conservative state which had done very well while the rest of the nation suffered under the yoke of Obama. He gave few interviews prior to his entry and his retail politics were good. He’s a good looking, upstanding, ex-military guy who, it seemed, could make a good strong speech touting conservative values. Conservatives looking for a good alternative to Romney with the credentials to beat Obama, jumped ship from Bachmann and Cain to Perry based on his obviously stronger credentials.

Playing in the background the whole time was Newt. A seemingly frumpy old man with a reputation for making enemies, questionable allegiances, and marrying everything that moved. Yes, conservatives knew he was conservative (largely) and they knew he had been a leader in the glory days, but who wants to fool with the old toys (even if you liked them) when there are shiny new ones to play with? So off they went to play with Bachmann, Cain and Perry. Then, to everyone’s chagrin, the new toys broke. Bachmann turned vicious and hurt herself while she was attempting to hurt Perry. Perry squandered his outstanding Texas credentials by failing to personally live up to expectations by being unprepared to debate and by being unable to clearly and forthrightly articulate his positions (particularly on immigration). Cain lived for awhile on his charm and his race and then on 9-9-9. Once under the spotlight however, it became apparent that Cain couldn’t handle the heat. The initial sexual allegations didn’t hurt him much, but his handling of the matter made his Presidential qualifications suspect. Then came the Libya thing. There is nothing wrong with taking time to gather one’s thoughts, but you can’t come across like you’ve been cramming for an exam and just can’t remember the answer because you’ve got so much “twirling around in my head.” Conservatives began to see that Cain was just not ready for prime time.

Unlike the others, Newt’s campaign did not begin with a pop – it was more like a fizzle. He announced his candidacy on the internet (no pomp and circumstance), He was unprepared for the silly questions – “why do you have a large credit line at Tiffany’s?” His staff very publicly deserted him early in the campaign, ostensibly because they believed Newt was not committed to the campaign. Newt’s plan however, was based on the theory (now proved) that over time substance would prevail over flash. He was right. Newt chugged along and when the novelty of the new candidates wore off, the electorate began to remember why they liked their old reliable toys to begin with. They were rugged, they were interesting and they rarely let you down.

So Newt got a second look, and the closer conservatives looked the more they liked what they were seeing. A man who is unafraid of the media and doesn’t need notes to articulately espouse and defend his positions; a man who refuses to bash his primary opponents (even when they lie about him); a man who actually answers questions forthrightly and unapologetically; a man whose bearing is more that of statesman than of a politician; a man who operates with encyclopedic historical knowledge and perspective. Newt is the real deal.

There is a saying in the sales world, “you sell the sizzle, not the steak.” This is what got us Barak Obama and it is what propelled the other Republican candidates into their short-lived front runner status. This is what keeps Mitt Romney is the game. While conservative voters may be temporarily distracted sizzle, they BUY the steak. Newt is 100% aged American beef. Conservative voters know it doesn’t get any better. Newt will win both the Republican nomination and the White House.

Saturday, November 19, 2011



No one is ever going to accuse me of being a humble guy. The fact is that I like to think I am pretty bright. I have however, recently been involved in trying to figure out whom in the Republican field would be best to take on Barak Obama and rescue us from this four year nightmare that started out as a light, pleasant, dream. In that search, I have quite literally stumbled over a man whose intellect, passion and drive I find almost frightening – Newt Gingrich.

Newt is not the best looking guy (person) in the field. Truth be told, he would not be movie cast in the roll of POTUS (Obama would be). He doesn’t have the great hair and looks of Perry and Romney, the elegant stature of Michelle Bachman, or the instant likeability of Herman Cain. In fact, Newt has kind of a devilish smile that is a little off-putting. Unfortunately, some people will actually make their voting decisions based on this type of criteria (the OWS types if they make it to the polls at all). Most of us however are looking for a little more depth in our candidate. After four years of witnessing a man pretending to be President, most of us would like to have someone in office that can actually DO the job as opposed to sucking up the perks and voting “present” whenever possible. Not even Newt’s worst detractors can claim that he is unqualified to be President of the United States. In truth, one could not ask for a better resume. But resumes aside, just listening to him speak extemporaneously, at length, without a teleprompter, is a thing of pure beauty. Newt is the kind of a guy who gets bigger and better looking the longer you listen to him.

Quite by accident, I happened to catch the current President and one of the Republican candidates (separately) on TV News immediately after having listened to Newt speaking in Iowa. It was at that moment that it struck me hard, that Newt is not only the best candidate in the field, he is a giant among children. Having just listened to Newt give his extemporaneous remarks with regard to the direction of the country, I was aghast at the shallowness and political hackery of both the President and the Republican candidate. The difference was stark and easy to define – Newt was talking from his heart, without fear, as to what he knew and believed, and from his experience as to how best to accomplish the necessary ends. The other folks were just saying what they believed they needed to say to curry the most favor. The contrast was as stunning and shocking as if I had just learned that I had been accepting financial advice from my 10 year old son.

It was also then that I realized why Newt has now come to forefront of the Republican nomination process. Republicans didn’t want Romney in 2008 and they really don’t want him now (this is why he cannot get above 25% in the polls), but he does at least look the part and he can speak without stumbling over every other word. However, seventy five percent (75%) of Republicans want somebody else. Newt is not the first person to whom they gravitated because, as stated above, he doesn’t look so good from far away and then there’s all that baggage. Note that Newt did not enter the race with the immediate high poll number of Romney, Perry or Bachman and he got off to a poor start. However, as Republicans started looking closer at their candidates, those who looked good from far often were far from good up close (Perry being the poster child for unfulfilled expectations). Unsatisfied with the shiny, new, heretofore unheard of candidates, Newt got a second look. Low and behold, the frumpy old guy (no insult intended) with all the baggage looks much better up close than he does from far away.

Newt is not a man who is going to embarrass you in a debate or be easily demonized as “stupid,” as is always done to Republican Presidential candidates. Having written over twenty books on the issues of the day, he has full command of the issues and an uncanny ability to articulate them. Having been two-heartbeats from the Presidency as Speaker of the House, there are few who can claim a better understanding of the workings of Washington. Having actually accomplished things in the Congress he has had his baptism of fire and come out stronger for it. Interestingly, those who would now criticize Newt for having had the courage of his convictions during his time in Congress (and thereby having made some enemies), are the same people who lament the cowardly reluctance of the existing Congress to do anything politically provocative.

Newt is not just smart (Romney and Obama are both smart in their own ways), he is both visionary and able to transform vision into reality. When I think of our founding fathers, I have difficulty placing any of our recent Presidents in their company (save perhaps Reagan). I can quite easily, however, visualize Newt among the members of the Continental Congress debating and forging the new Constitution. Somehow, I have great difficulty putting Barak Obama or Mitt Romney in that setting. One need only watch Newt lecture on the issue of the day to see a man who stands above others with his vision and intellect. He is a giant of our time.

Republicans now realize that while it’s good to have hair (and Newt’s isn’t bad), it’s even better when you have something under it.