Best Argument For A Newt Gingrich GOP Nomination Out Of Iowa

In a tweet minutes after Deace announced his endorsement, Gingrich tweeted "my thanks to @SteveDeaceShow for his endorsement tonight." Image Credit: The Vault at steavedeace.com


Best Argument For A Newt Gingrich GOP Nomination Out Of Iowa

Influential Iowa state based radio talk show host, Steve Deace, endorses a vote for Newt Gingrich as the next Republican nominee for President of the United States and puts forth the best argument placed so far.

Steve Deace, a popular social conservative radio talk show host whose program is heard statewide in Iowa is backing Newt Gingrich for president and puts forward his reasoning in a way that allows one to cut through the mountain of irrelevant talking points on every candidate, they are all fatally flawed. Deace comes forward with a standout nugget of truth as to how our country has wandered so far off of its personal-freedom based tracks and should appeal to all of those who hold to what the Tea Party movement brought forward in its activism over the past couple of years - simply stated, our country needs to get back to core values informed through the United States Constitution, the Bill-Of-Rights, and the Rule-Of-Law.

The nugget is the singular recognition by Newt Gingrich that one branch of Government is allowed to operate without any check or balance, the Judicial Branch, and needs to be put back in equilibrium with the other two branches ... The Executive Branch (the office of the President) and Legislative Branch (the House of Representatives and the Senate).

This excerpted and edited from The Vault at steavedeace.com -

Why I Am Endorsing Newt Gingrich for President
30 December 2011 - 17:34 GMT - By Steve Deace

This country is in trouble and bold leadership is needed. As someone that has had the privilege to vet these candidates as closely as just about anybody else has, I’ve come to the conclusion there are several good, Christian people running that most years I would vote for.

However, this isn’t most years.

Sadly, there are only two candidates offering a real means by which to actually undo that which the Left has done to this country for the past 50 years, and not just conservative platitudes. One of those candidates is Ron Paul, but his foreign policy is naive at best and reckless at worst. The other is Newt Gingrich, who has campaigned on what I believe is the most important issue facing us as a people — the loss of the rule of law.

The Left has used unelected judges and judicial oligarchy to reinvent the American way of life, from secularism to the loss of the sanctity of life, to the redefining of marriage, the confiscation of private property, and the granting of imaginary rights. There is an entire chapter of my new book devoted to the need for conservatives and Christians to confront judicial oligarchy once and for all. I have spent the past two years of my radio program educating my audience on this issue, and was a vocal proponent of Iowa’s historic judicial retention election last year, and Newt’s assistance with that effort was vital.

After offering every candidate in the race the chance to show they understand the gravity of this issue, Gingrich is the only one who has demonstrated he does, and can also use the bully pulpit of the presidency to educate Americans on the need to return to the rule of law.
----
Electing another Obamney from the ruling class changes nothing. Electing another nice conservative with no proven ability to govern or a killer instinct to take on the system changes nothing, even if it makes us all feel warm and fuzzy inside.

This is a time for leadership, not warm fuzzies. The future is at stake, and we may never get another environment with the country so prepared to challenge the system as we have right now.
----
It is my hope the other Republican candidates will follow Gingrich’s bold leadership in providing the country a true alternative to President Obama.

It is my prayer that next year that for once we actually have something to vote for, and not just something to vote against. I am making this endorsement in the hopes that will be the case. Sometimes the most broken people are the ones God does the most tremendous work through. I know that has been true in my life.
[Reference Here]

The Constitution, the Bill-Of-Rights, and the Rule-Of-Law represent the recipe by which we begin to have the Government become right-sized and functional once again for all citizens who wish to recapture what Ronald Reagan called "the shining city on the hill" ... a personal-freedom based United States of America with equal justice and access to all of its citizens.


<Article first seen as Best Argument For A Newt Gingrich Nomination Out Of Iowa at Technorati>

Boxer VFW Endorsement In Dispute By VFW Leadership

Photo of letter issued by the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States calling the actions of the VFW-PAC into question as it relates to political endorsements. This photo was taken at a protest rally outside of the VFW-PAC news conference to endorse Barbara Boxer for her fifth term as United States Senator. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (2010)

Boxer VFW Endorsement In Dispute By VFW Leadership

In what may be a case of identity theft through going rogue, the separate political action committee organization using the "VFW" in its name is endorsing candidates without the blessing of the real VFW organization out of Kansas City, MO.

In a letter issued October 8, 2010 titled "VFW Leadership at Odds with VFW-PAC" and signed by Richard L. Eubank - National Commander, Richard L. DeNoyer - Sr. Vice Commander, and John E. Hamilton - Jr. Vice Commander the VFW called the methodology process used by the PAC "seriously flawed at best this year and in immediate need of extensive review," in the wake of the recent congressional endorsements made by the committee.

This separate organization, formed by 12 VFW members, is acting rogue in their endorsements of Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi - especially given that the voting record and personal statements of these candidates should have had them removed from consideration.

This photo was taken at a protest rally outside of the VFW-PAC news conference to endorse Barbara Boxer for her fifth term as United States Senator. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (2010)

This excerpted and edited from the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States website -

VFW Leadership at Odds with VFW-PAC
By Richard L. Eubank - National Commander, Richard L. DeNoyer - Sr. Vice Commander, and John E. Hamilton - Jr. Vice Commander - October 8, 2010 - VFW, Kansas City, MO.

“Even though the law requires that VFW-PAC be a separate organization, the acronym ‘VFW’ is attached to the committee and the natural assumption is that the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States is somehow making the endorsement decisions. Nothing could be further from the truth, but perception is reality,” said National Commander Richard Eubank.

“Obviously, an organization's political positions have to reflect the opinions of its members. But those opinions can't be perceived as ‘off the wall,’ and the methodology used this year to grade candidates obviously is skewed in favor of the incumbent. That isn’t fair, and it actually subverts the democratic process.”
Reference Here>>

Paul Chabot - Statewide Chairman, Veterans for Carly Coalition, Iraq War Vet, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (Kansas City) Lifemember) as he presents the letter from the VFW leadership out of Kansas City, MO, and reviews Barbara Boxer's voting record on Veteran's Affairs. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (2010)

Barbara Boxers record is as follows (re-published from LA Conservative Examiner):

To be clear, this endorsement should be protested on these facts on the actions and voting record of this current Senator from California (information provided by the Pasadena Patriots - TeaPac - Paul Chabot - Statewide Chairman, Veterans for Carly Coalition, Iraq War Vet, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (Kansas City) Lifemember):

Boxer Military Fact Check

1) Barbara Boxer continues to campaign with Jane Fonda. I do not have to remind Veterans the harm that Jane Fonda caused to our Nation - they know all too well.

2) In California, we have 1.9 million Veterans, 30,000 returning from war each year. While the California unemployment rate is 12.4%, Veterans in California have over a 30% unemployment rate. Of the total number of unemployed persons in California, 25% are Veterans. The problem has gotten much worse under Boxer, not better.

3) Our VA Hospitals are overloaded, bulging at the seams; the quality of care is decreasing while wait lines are increasing beyond any reasonable expectation. As a Vet who receives care at California VA's, I can firmly
attest to this fact and the outrage felt by my fellow Veterans.

4) Barbara Boxer has consistently voted against funding for our troops in times of war. In 2007, she was one of only 14 senators to vote against supplemental funding for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. That bill included billions of dollars in funding for body armor, for mine-resistant vehicles, for defense health programs - including funding for the treatment of soldiers suffering from PTSD and brain trauma - and to help combat IEDs.

5) In 2003, Boxer was one of just 12 senators to oppose the $87 billion supplemental appropriation for the reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, which provided funding for body armor, communications equipment, equipment maintenance and operation, defense health programs, increased imminent danger pay. The reconstruction package also included funds to help military families by increasing the Family Separation Allowance, by allowing family members to visit soldiers who are ill or injured as a result of their active-duty service and by providing access to the benefits of the Family Medical Leave Act.

6) Boxer has repeatedly disrespected prominent members of our military. Who can forget the time she upbraided Brigadier General Michael Walsh during a committee hearing for calling her "ma'am" instead of "senator."

7) Boxer has also refused to condemn the offensive, defamatory advertisement MoveOn.org ran against General David Petraeus, who is now commanding our forces in Afghanistan.

It is for these reasons, that we must ask the VFW-PAC to rescind its endorsement of Barbara Boxer.

Reference Here>>

This photo was taken at a protest rally outside of the VFW-PAC news conference to endorse Barbara Boxer for her fifth term as United States Senator. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (2010)

This excerpted and edited from the LA Times -

Boxer highlights endorsement by VFW-PAC
By: Cathleen Decker - October 10, 2010 | 5:13 pm

Fiorina has been critical of Boxer’s record on military issues, including Boxer's vote against a military spending bill that Boxer opposed because she said it did not outline a clear exit strategy from Iraq. On Sunday after speaking at a civic affairs conference hosted by the Iranian American Jewish community in Century City, Fiorina said the VFW PAC had “lost a great deal of credibility because they’ve demonstrated once again that all they ever do is endorse incumbent politicians.”

“There are a great number of veterans who are offended by Boxer’s refusal to support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan," Fiorina told reporters Sunday. "There are veterans who are offended by the way she dressed down a general, and there are, unfortunately for the VFW PAC, now a whole lot of veterans who are offended by the decision the VFW PAC has taken.”

Fiorina’s campaign also released a statement by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and other military veterans, objecting to the VFW's endorsement of her. (McCain is campaigning for Fiorina).

Asked after her speech about McCain's objection, Boxer merely smiled and replied: "I'm so excited to have the VFW endorsement. I couldn't be more thrilled."
Reference Here>>

This photo was taken at a protest rally outside of the VFW-PAC news conference to endorse Barbara Boxer for her fifth term as United States Senator. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (2010)

Well, no matter how tainted or in dispute, or bogus an endorsement may be (especially given one's own voting record and personal statements) ... the accepting of this VFW-PAC endorsement passes for something to be excited about by Barbara Boxer, here during Carter's Second Term (the 44th Presidency of the United States).

Boxer Endorsement UPDATE - VFW Leaders Tell PAC to Rescind Boxer, Klein Endorsements - Published October 13, 2010 | FOX News/Associated Press

VFW UPDATE - VFW Commander-in-Chief disolvess its Political Action Committee (VFW-PAC) after disputed endorsements - October 15, 2010

It is now evident to most of the VFW leadership, both National and especially the departments, that the VFW has been subjected to extreme negative publicity throughout the nation, and the recent endorsement decisions have, in fact, harmed the VFW’s reputation and future ability to fulfill our mission.

I cannot let this erosion of public support for our great organization continue. The apparent lack of the committee to address these concerns will lead to a proposal by me, as Commander-in-Chief, to amend the by-laws at the 112th National Convention for the purpose of dissolving the PAC. Meanwhile, under the authority granted to me as Commander-in-Chief in section 619 of the VFW National By-Laws and under section 620 of the Manual of Procedure, I am withdrawing all PAC appointments effective October 15, 2010.

“General WMD” Powell Endorses “Senator Speech” Obama

Colin Powell hailed the Sen. Obama as a "transformational figure" and expressed disappointment in the negative tone of Sen. John McCain's campaign, as well as his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as running mate. Image Credit: Meet The Press – NBC

“General WMD” Powell Endorses “Senator Speech” Obama

Nobody can make this stuff up!

At this very moment with a little more than two weeks before the election, Senator Barack Obama had spent a total of 143 days on the floor of the United States Senate before declaring his intention to become the candidate nominee of the Democrat Party for the office of President of the United States. During the primary process before he was able to secure his political party’s nomination, he had to compete against Senator Hillary Clinton who characterized her opponent as a person who’s only accomplishment was a speech given stating a position as being against the war in Iraq.

Colin Powell is a Free Enterprise citizen making money from speeches he gives on behalf of his long list of accomplishments which include directing and winning the first Gulf War (an action opposed by then Senator and current Vice-Presidential candidate, Joe Biden) under George Bush, President #41, and being the Secretary of State and selling the invasion of Iraq by the United States to the United Nations for George Bush, President #43.

Step back in time with me for a moment and have your brain fire off in a synapse cluster.

After September 11, 2001, our Government was looking to respond and hunt down the forces that were aligned to attack the United States and thereby the free world.

In the run up to our impending invasion of Iraq, Barack Obama and Colin Powell were leading distinctly different lives.

This excerpted and edited from The White House website -

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell Addresses the U.N. Security Council
This transcript includes the slides that were displayed during the remarks. They are placed in the text approximately where they were displayed in the address. To view the slides, click on the graphic (a pop-up window will appear).
February 5, 2003

For more than 20 years, by word and by deed Saddam Hussein has pursued his ambition to dominate Iraq and the broader Middle East using the only means he knows, intimidation, coercion and annihilation of all those who might stand in his way. For Saddam Hussein, possession of the world's most deadly weapons is the ultimate trump card, the one he most hold to fulfill his ambition.

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction; he's determined to make more. Given Saddam Hussein's history of aggression, given what we know of his grandiose plans, given what we know of his terrorist associations and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not some day use these weapons at a time and the place and in the manner of his choosing at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond?

The United States will not and cannot run that risk to the American people. Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option, not in a post-September 11th world.
Reference Here>>

Colin Powell said this with having all of his “skin-in-the-game” as Secretary Of State of the United States and delivered his presentation in front of the world representatives gathered at the United Nations.

At this very time of Colin Powell’s presentation to the United Nations, Barack Obama was gearing up his (eventually unopposed) run for the office of United States Senator from the state of Illinois.

This edited and excerpted from The Black Commentator -

The Black Commentator
Issue Number 45 - June 5, 2003

Barack Obama, [an ACORN community organizer,] a constitutional law professor and state senator from the south side of Chicago, is a leading candidate for the US Senate in the March 2004 Illinois Democratic primary. It's an open seat with no incumbent. In a crowded field that includes three well-known and better-funded opponents, Obama is definitely a contender. But who is Barack Obama?
----
At an antiwar meeting last October, 2002, Obama was certainly pitching to that Democratic base in the progressive and African American community:

"I don't oppose all wars ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
----
"That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics .... "
Reference Here>>

Barack Obama said this without having any “skin-in-the-game” to a small crowd of like minded people gathered at an antiwar meeting in Chicago, Illinois.

This weekend with a little more than two weeks left before the election, Free Market citizen and professed Republican (speaking fees estimated at $100,000 per appearance), Colin Powell announced his endorsement for Barack Obama.

This edited and excerpted from Meet The Press, October 19, 2008 –

'Meet the Press' transcript for Oct. 19, 2008
Former Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell (Ret.), Chuck Todd, David Brooks, Jon Meacham, Andrea Mitchell, Joe Scarborough

[Colin Powell]

I know both of these individuals very well now. I've known John for 25 years as your setup said. And I've gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years. Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country. Either one of them, I think, would be a good president. I have said to Mr. McCain that I admire all he has done. I have some concerns about the direction that the party has taken in recent years. It has moved more to the right than I would like to see it, but that's a choice the party makes. And I've said to Mr. Obama, "You have to pass a test of do you have enough experience, and do you bring the judgment to the table that would give us confidence that you would be a good president."
----
So, when I look at all of this and I think back to my Army career, we've got two individuals, either one of them could be a good president. But which is the president that we need now? Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time? And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities--and we have to take that into account--as well as his substance--he has both style and substance--he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world--onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Senator Barack Obama.
Reference Here>>

So there you have it, former Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell endorses junior Senator fom Illinois, Barack Obama for President of the United States. He does so by sighting Style and Substance and not one word about his life accomplishments, and possible philosophical ideals that would be good for all of America to embrace.

OUCH!

This is a Republican who sold the world on the fact that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) and was heralded for his prowess as a successful chief warrior when our country was called on by the world to move the invasion army of Iraq out of Kuwait in the first Gulf War.

This is also a Republican who opposes the right to life for the unborn, opposes the appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. Does he also disapprove of his appointments to being a Four-Star General in the Army (President Ronald Reagan, #40), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Military (President George H.W. Bush, #41), and Secretary of State of the United States (President George W. Bush, #43)?

With a Republican like this ... who needs Democrats?

We can only imagine what type of position a Colin Powell has negotiated for himself in a Barack Obama administration. Oh, and do not forget ... this endorsement isn't about race.