Advice to Sarah Palin from an Ardent Admirer re Establishment Republicans and Tea-Partiers re Gingrich and Romney.·
Wrenn, Editor, PoliSat.Com , PoliticalXray.Com .
January 28, 2012--
Before I take issue with major aspects of your FaceBook post on January 27, 2012, I'm constrained to make clear that from the time of your entry onto the national political stage I have been an ardent admirer of you as a person, as a mother, as a woman, as an entrepreneur, as an American imbued with an allegiance to the principles of liberty our Founders would have most admired by virtue of the fact that as a public official in Alaska you put principle before your own personal economic (and political) well-being in exposing political corruption (for which uncorrupted allegiance to principle the voters of Alaska later elected you their Governor), as a candidate for Vice President in 2008, and (since 2008) as a vocal advocate for limited-government/strong-defense and recognition that it's America's Constitution that makes it exceptional in all of human history. I take a back seat to no one in extolling your admirable qualities and common-sense judgment. And, I expressed understanding (rather than condemnation) of your reasoning for your decision to resign as Governor of Alaska. (Should you have any doubt my above-assertions of enthusiastic support for you I've previously expressed, scroll down to the end of this article and view the videos and links for such prior expressions of support.)
Now, assuming I've precluded any basis upon which you could view my following criticism as a manifestation of the "Republican Establishment" (of which I am not, and have never been, a member), it's my hope that my criticism of the flaws in your reasoning in your January 27, 2012, Facebook post will inspire introspection on your part. So, here's my effort to do so:
First, the "Republican Establishment":
(1) did NOT force Newt to sit on the bench with Nancy Pelosi to tout Al Gore's AGW religion as science;
(2) did NOT force Newt to get into bed with Freddie Mac;
(3) did NOT force Newt to back-stab Bush in 2007 when Bush was seeking support for the surge in Iraq;
(4) did NOT force Newt to disparage Paul Ryan's deficit-reduction plan as "right wing social engineering";
(5) did NOT force Newt to issue serially contradictory statements about Libya when Obama decided to "lead from behind" in Libya;
(6) did NOT force Newt to advocate leftist dogma in attacking Romney regarding Bain.
(7) did NOT force Newt to make class-envy attacks on Romney about his "Swiss bank account" and his wealth.
(8) did NOT force Newt to smear Romney as "anti-immigrant" rather than anti-illegal-immigration, for which smear Marc Rubio (not an "establishment" type) quit properly castigated Newt.
These are just a few of the things Newt has done to earn my contempt, which wasn't easy for him to earn because in 1994 I viewed him as one who had hit a historic grand slam for limited government. However, over the years, it slowly dawned on my feeble mind that he is the same kind of Machiavellian narcissist as is Bill Clinton. I'm surprised you (and Todd) haven't discerned this also. As the eight points above illustrate, he's willing to make whatever argument on any given subject that may seem to his clever mind to be advantageous for him in the moment of the argument. His loyalty to principles is about as strong as his loyalty to his wives.
Am I an apologist/supporter for Romney? Hardly-- see the video and photoshop image immediately below. Do I think Romney's flawed positions make him the unprincipled person I deem Newt to be? No.
So, what is my criticism of your Facebook post blaming the "Republican Establishment" for "attacking" Newt? I think that not only the "Republican Establishment" BUT ALSO THE TEA-PARTY supporters OUGHT to attack the kind of leftist nonsense Newt is willing to spout whenever he momentarily deems it advantageous for him to do so. Am I a "tea party" official? No. Have I attended numerous tea-party events, the two 9-12 events in DeeCee, and Gathering of Eagles events before that? Yes. But I only claim to be a spokesman for myself.
Do I think it's vital to our country's future that Obama not be reelected? Absolutely. Does your "Republican Establishment" versus "the tea party" meme increase or decrease our chances of succeeding in defeating Obama? I have no doubt that it decreases such chances. So I hope you'll reevaluate your current "Republican Establishment versus Tea-Party" strategy before it morphs into a Newtonian affliction.
Would I vote for Gingrich if he were to get the nomination? Of course. I'd rather suffer under his erraticism than under Obama's ideological fervor. Would I vote for Romney? Of course. Would I vote for Santorum? Of course. Would I vote for Ron Paul? Of course not. (Would I vote for you? Absolutely!)
Permanent Link: http://PoliSat.Com/To-Sarah-Palin-Re-Gingrich-and-Romney-2012.htm .
Prior Work Regarding Sarah Palin:
Prior Work Regarding Sarah Palin:
Palintology Video in 2010: