IF offered, Newt will accept
As readers know I have been blogging about the absolute necessity for the RNC to go through a top-to-bottom reformation. Some have accused us, wrongly, of wanting to jettison moderates and independents. WE don't want that. What we do want is a return to the party's conservative roots. I have presented two people who could pull this off: Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.
The news today is that if it's offered Newt would be open to accepting it:
Newt Gingrich has let it be known that, if Republicans want him, the former U.S House speaker is willing to serve as chairman of the national party and lead it out of the wilderness it’s blundered into.
The question is whether the 168-member Republican National Committee is open to the match.
“If a majority of the RNC thought he was needed, he would accept that appointment,” said Randy Evans’ Gingrich’s close friend and legal counsel. “He fully appreciates the urgency of the moment.”
What might strike some as coyness is in fact caution. The odds are stacked against the former Georgia congressman, for several reasons.
For one thing, six days after the election of Barack Obama and substantial gains by Democrats in the House and Senate, Republicans have yet to decide whether a serious overhaul of the party is required.
[This is why we need someone like Gingrich to step in because he's been saying that the party had lost it's way for years. A recent interview aired by Captain Ed Morrissey on his Hot-Air 'Net radio show has Gingrich pointing to a number of factors that have hurt the party in the last decade. Dick Armey agrees with him on several points. We must make changes to be competitive in the years ahead. Any fool in the RNC that claims no changes are needed should be removed. Moving to the center is exactly what cost the Republicans their majorities in Congress, and what cost them the White House.]
If a revolution is in order, then there’s the small matter of which side is issued the pitchforks, and whose castle is to be stormed. Is this a fight to purge moderates, or a battle to expand the tent?
“The RNC has to do some soul-searching and decide what level of change is necessary,” Evans said. “If that answer is bold, energetic change led by someone who has done it before, then Newt would be a good choice.”
If the party is eying a shift toward the middle, Evans added, “that isn’t Newt.”
[Maybe I need to remind people here that we don't want anyone purged unless they don't want to go along with what's necessary to rebuild the Republican party. Scott Rasmussen makes the observation today that the Reagan conservatism isn't dead and that the base seriously wants to return to that. President Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was a failure precisely because it was nothing more than growing the government and spending taxpayer money like Democrats did. The party lost it's way -- it lost it's identity -- over the last decade or so. Gingrich isn't going to accept the position if the idea behind the RNC's 168 member coalition is to move more to the center. In case the RNC missed this, but moving from right to the center is a move to the Left which really does tick off the base.]
Though he retains his reputation as a polarizing figure, Gingrich served as a sideline strategist for the GOP during the presidential season. He pointed McCain to the issue of offshore drilling. But Gingrich also helped generate skepticism over the Wall Street bailout — which McCain and other Senate Republicans supported.
A Gingrich chairmanship might get loud support from the GOP’s talk-radio contingent. The former House speaker has close ties to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Neal Boortz.
But the RNC is a different, often parochial animal, made up of the top three members of the GOP establishment in every state and U.S. territory, plus the District of Columbia. ...
Those interested in the job include Saul Anuzis, chairman of the Michigan GOP, and Katon Dawson, the South Carolina chairman. The current RNC chairman, Mike Duncan, also seeks another term.
One potential candidate who has taken himself out of the race is RNC member Alec Poitevint of Bainbridge, who chaired the successful McCain campaign in Georgia. Poitevint said he’ll concentrate on the re-election of Saxby Chambliss to the U.S. Senate.
Pointevint wouldn’t tip his hand on who he intends to vote for in January. But he said any candidate interested in the chairmanship job needs to prove his mettle — by showing up in Georgia to help Chambliss through the runoff.
Sue Everhart, the state GOP chairman and another RNC member, in previous conversations hasn’t expressed enthusiasm for a Gingrich chairmanship. But Georgia’s third RNC member, Linda Herren of Atlanta, said making Gingrich the official voice of the GOP would be fine by her.
“There were too many deals cut with the Democrats. We have no rudder,” Herren said. On the other hand, she said, if Gingrich really wants the GOP chairmanship, a front-porch strategy won’t cut it. She’s already been lobbied by a half-dozen candidates.
We could care less who in talk radio likes Gingrich. Talk radio doesn't command our ideology. WE command it, and it's completely conservative. I can say that I have spoken with several Republicans that are disheartened with the loss last Tuesday, and on the heels of my blog post regarding what must be done, they agree with me. It's time to clean house. It's time to return to our roots. Either Romney or Gingrich would be perfect for the job.
-- They both know how to organize.
-- They both know they need new blood in the party; conservative blood for the future.
-- They both know how to raise funds, and do it effectively.
-- They both know that our Internet efforts are paltry compared to the Democrats.
-- They both know we need to reach out to the youth, and get them invigorated.
Either one would be good for the job, but we'd prefer Newt Gingrich for two reasons. First, he was one of the principle authors of the Contract with America that excited the base back in 1994. Second, he knows how to run a fifty-state strategy to win. He helped orchestrate that in the 1994 Revolution that retook the House.
A lot of people aren't thrilled with Gingrich. His recent, tepid support of needing to do more to combat the non-existent global warming (or as we prefer, "Goracle Warming") irked a lot of those in the base. That particular venture should prove that people do know how to pander, and while Gingrich may disagree with that particular assumption, we haven't heard him discuss that topic since he did the stupid public-service soundbites with Pelosi earlier this year.
Some say he has too much baggage. That's a fine assessment if he were running for president, but he's not. He is open to being the RNC chairman, and we welcome that. If we do get Gingrich to head up the party, we have a chance in 2010, and that folks is the first battleground for us. Forget about the idiots out there jockeying for a shot at 2012. We need the change in the RNC FIRST. You have to learn how to walk before you can run, and the changes needed in the GOP are the steps to get us back on our feet. We will wholeheartedly welcome Gingrich as the RNC chair, if it's offered to him, and only if the RNC is willing to accept what he sees for what must be done. If they're going to be inflexible with change, then he shouldn't even waste his time.
Publius II
ADDENDUM: Go to Rebuild the Party and take a look at what this coalition wants to do. They've recognized the mistakes of the past, and they've assembled a mission statement explaining what must be done. Newt has the resume to be able to pull this off. Oh, and Captain Ed is on the same page we are about this.
ADDENDUM II: A few readers have e-mailed me to let me know that Mitt is out according to this from K-Lo:
The bad news from USS NR this morning: Both Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney turned down the RNC chair job when I offered it to each this morning. (Aren't you glad to know it's mine to give away?) The good news: Mike Steele seems to be a frontrunner in the hearts of the crowd here.
For the record, I saw that last night at NRO's The Corner. Color us just a tad disappointed that Mitt wouldn't consider taking the post. Fred, on the other hand, was never in contemplation for us. Fred's job should be what he is now -- a voice for conservatives in the party. Michael Steele wouldn't be a bad choice considering he did head up GOPAC for the Republicans, and he has the youthful side that we need to appeal to younger, more politically active people. We'll have to look at what he did with GOPAC before we consider him. So until we do that, right now we consider Newt the frontrunner for this position.
The news today is that if it's offered Newt would be open to accepting it:
Newt Gingrich has let it be known that, if Republicans want him, the former U.S House speaker is willing to serve as chairman of the national party and lead it out of the wilderness it’s blundered into.
The question is whether the 168-member Republican National Committee is open to the match.
“If a majority of the RNC thought he was needed, he would accept that appointment,” said Randy Evans’ Gingrich’s close friend and legal counsel. “He fully appreciates the urgency of the moment.”
What might strike some as coyness is in fact caution. The odds are stacked against the former Georgia congressman, for several reasons.
For one thing, six days after the election of Barack Obama and substantial gains by Democrats in the House and Senate, Republicans have yet to decide whether a serious overhaul of the party is required.
[This is why we need someone like Gingrich to step in because he's been saying that the party had lost it's way for years. A recent interview aired by Captain Ed Morrissey on his Hot-Air 'Net radio show has Gingrich pointing to a number of factors that have hurt the party in the last decade. Dick Armey agrees with him on several points. We must make changes to be competitive in the years ahead. Any fool in the RNC that claims no changes are needed should be removed. Moving to the center is exactly what cost the Republicans their majorities in Congress, and what cost them the White House.]
If a revolution is in order, then there’s the small matter of which side is issued the pitchforks, and whose castle is to be stormed. Is this a fight to purge moderates, or a battle to expand the tent?
“The RNC has to do some soul-searching and decide what level of change is necessary,” Evans said. “If that answer is bold, energetic change led by someone who has done it before, then Newt would be a good choice.”
If the party is eying a shift toward the middle, Evans added, “that isn’t Newt.”
[Maybe I need to remind people here that we don't want anyone purged unless they don't want to go along with what's necessary to rebuild the Republican party. Scott Rasmussen makes the observation today that the Reagan conservatism isn't dead and that the base seriously wants to return to that. President Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was a failure precisely because it was nothing more than growing the government and spending taxpayer money like Democrats did. The party lost it's way -- it lost it's identity -- over the last decade or so. Gingrich isn't going to accept the position if the idea behind the RNC's 168 member coalition is to move more to the center. In case the RNC missed this, but moving from right to the center is a move to the Left which really does tick off the base.]
Though he retains his reputation as a polarizing figure, Gingrich served as a sideline strategist for the GOP during the presidential season. He pointed McCain to the issue of offshore drilling. But Gingrich also helped generate skepticism over the Wall Street bailout — which McCain and other Senate Republicans supported.
A Gingrich chairmanship might get loud support from the GOP’s talk-radio contingent. The former House speaker has close ties to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Neal Boortz.
But the RNC is a different, often parochial animal, made up of the top three members of the GOP establishment in every state and U.S. territory, plus the District of Columbia. ...
Those interested in the job include Saul Anuzis, chairman of the Michigan GOP, and Katon Dawson, the South Carolina chairman. The current RNC chairman, Mike Duncan, also seeks another term.
One potential candidate who has taken himself out of the race is RNC member Alec Poitevint of Bainbridge, who chaired the successful McCain campaign in Georgia. Poitevint said he’ll concentrate on the re-election of Saxby Chambliss to the U.S. Senate.
Pointevint wouldn’t tip his hand on who he intends to vote for in January. But he said any candidate interested in the chairmanship job needs to prove his mettle — by showing up in Georgia to help Chambliss through the runoff.
Sue Everhart, the state GOP chairman and another RNC member, in previous conversations hasn’t expressed enthusiasm for a Gingrich chairmanship. But Georgia’s third RNC member, Linda Herren of Atlanta, said making Gingrich the official voice of the GOP would be fine by her.
“There were too many deals cut with the Democrats. We have no rudder,” Herren said. On the other hand, she said, if Gingrich really wants the GOP chairmanship, a front-porch strategy won’t cut it. She’s already been lobbied by a half-dozen candidates.
We could care less who in talk radio likes Gingrich. Talk radio doesn't command our ideology. WE command it, and it's completely conservative. I can say that I have spoken with several Republicans that are disheartened with the loss last Tuesday, and on the heels of my blog post regarding what must be done, they agree with me. It's time to clean house. It's time to return to our roots. Either Romney or Gingrich would be perfect for the job.
-- They both know how to organize.
-- They both know they need new blood in the party; conservative blood for the future.
-- They both know how to raise funds, and do it effectively.
-- They both know that our Internet efforts are paltry compared to the Democrats.
-- They both know we need to reach out to the youth, and get them invigorated.
Either one would be good for the job, but we'd prefer Newt Gingrich for two reasons. First, he was one of the principle authors of the Contract with America that excited the base back in 1994. Second, he knows how to run a fifty-state strategy to win. He helped orchestrate that in the 1994 Revolution that retook the House.
A lot of people aren't thrilled with Gingrich. His recent, tepid support of needing to do more to combat the non-existent global warming (or as we prefer, "Goracle Warming") irked a lot of those in the base. That particular venture should prove that people do know how to pander, and while Gingrich may disagree with that particular assumption, we haven't heard him discuss that topic since he did the stupid public-service soundbites with Pelosi earlier this year.
Some say he has too much baggage. That's a fine assessment if he were running for president, but he's not. He is open to being the RNC chairman, and we welcome that. If we do get Gingrich to head up the party, we have a chance in 2010, and that folks is the first battleground for us. Forget about the idiots out there jockeying for a shot at 2012. We need the change in the RNC FIRST. You have to learn how to walk before you can run, and the changes needed in the GOP are the steps to get us back on our feet. We will wholeheartedly welcome Gingrich as the RNC chair, if it's offered to him, and only if the RNC is willing to accept what he sees for what must be done. If they're going to be inflexible with change, then he shouldn't even waste his time.
Publius II
ADDENDUM: Go to Rebuild the Party and take a look at what this coalition wants to do. They've recognized the mistakes of the past, and they've assembled a mission statement explaining what must be done. Newt has the resume to be able to pull this off. Oh, and Captain Ed is on the same page we are about this.
ADDENDUM II: A few readers have e-mailed me to let me know that Mitt is out according to this from K-Lo:
The bad news from USS NR this morning: Both Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney turned down the RNC chair job when I offered it to each this morning. (Aren't you glad to know it's mine to give away?) The good news: Mike Steele seems to be a frontrunner in the hearts of the crowd here.
For the record, I saw that last night at NRO's The Corner. Color us just a tad disappointed that Mitt wouldn't consider taking the post. Fred, on the other hand, was never in contemplation for us. Fred's job should be what he is now -- a voice for conservatives in the party. Michael Steele wouldn't be a bad choice considering he did head up GOPAC for the Republicans, and he has the youthful side that we need to appeal to younger, more politically active people. We'll have to look at what he did with GOPAC before we consider him. So until we do that, right now we consider Newt the frontrunner for this position.
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:25 AM
1 Comments:
The left-wing illuminati will go too soft on these issues, it's their nature. That's why their views are so liberal.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home