Mr. Gingrich, you're dead wrong

We used to have a lot of respect for Newt Gingrich. He lead the Republican revolution in 1994, retaking the House, and ending the agenda that President Bill Clinton had in store for the nation. That revolution was sparked by the jam-down attempt by Hillary Clinton to pass socialized health care, and aided by the Federal Assault Weapons ban passed in September of 1994. Using both issues, and holding the Contract With America as the Republican promise to the voters, Mr. Gingrich stormed the House with overwhelming numbers to unseat the Democrats from power.

Since then he has become a McCain-esque maverick to the party. He has embraced the farce that is known as global warming, even starring in a commercial with Nancy Pelosi about it. But recently he has thrown his hat into the NY-23 special election between Bill Owens (D), Dede Scozzafava (R), and Doug Hoffman (C). Hoffman is running on the Conservative party ticket, but would've run as the Republican had there actually been a primary race. there wasn't because this is a special election, and thanks to backroom deals, Dede Scozzafava -- an ACORN connected, pro-abortion, pro-taxes candidate -- got the nod from the state's Republican party.

She's not a RINO, folks. She's a liberal Republican that would likely caucus with the Democrats in the House.

And Gingrich has thrown his support to her, putting party above ideology. He claims that any Republican who sides with Hoffman rather than Scozzafava is "misinformed" and that those people are determined to "remain a minority." He keeps citing the big tent idea posited by many a Republican spokesman and commentator. But what Gingirch misses is that Hoffman is a true Reagan conservative. Gingrich claims that Scozzafava is a Reagan Republican. The problem is that doesn't jive with what is known about Reagan.

Reagan believed in the big tent idea, but only to the point that it didn't compromise the conservative ideology. to liberal Republicans, like Scozzafava, Reagan would tell them to go their own way. Ne need applying to the party if you don't share the party's ideology. He could handle moderate Republicans -- like McCain, like Specter (no longer a Republican), like Graham -- because 70% of the time they were on his side. But there isn't a bloody thing that Scozzafava believes in that Reagan could ever embrace, let alone today's conservatives.

Gingrich is out of touch with the conservative base, and that's been proven by three key endorsements for Hoffman coming from Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, and today Fred Thompson. Those aren't moderates. those aren't people who are willing to sell out their ideology for accolades from the other side of the aisle. Mr. Gingrich appears to enjoy the applause from the Beltway elite instead of being the firebrand conservative that made him who he was.

"Misinformed," Mr. Gingrich? the only misinformed person in this debate appears to be you. We've got no problem being the big tent party. What we have a problem with are those that have views 180 degrees contrary to ours, and supposed leaders trying to browbeat us into submission in accepting that contrary ideology. Scozzafava may be a Republican, but she's no conservative, and shame on Newt Gingrich for attacking conservatives because they've chosen not to support her.

Publius II

ADDENDUM: 8:37 P.M. AZ Time -- I've got a lot of e-mail from people complaining about us writing Newt Gingrich off. They claim he's a good conservative, and that he'd never do anything to jeopardize the conservative movement.

OK, fair game. But what about his stance on global warming? He's on the side of man-made global warming which has NEVER been proven. The Big Tent theory is nice, but not when one supports -- outright supports -- a person who is: Pro-abortion; pro-gay marriage; was pro-taxes until Gingrich forced her hand for his support, into a no tax pledge:

I understand the concern about litmus tests and purges, but Scozzoflava does not pass a single test, litmus or otherwise, establishing her as conservative. She has long resisted any no-new-taxes pledge -- and in fact spoke favorably about them -- until Gingrich asked her to sign his pledge as a precondition for his support. Then she finally announced herself as against tax hikes.

No linkie to that, but I trust Gabriel's and Ace's word on it. For those still putting party first, get over it, already. This was concocted by party bosses in NY. Had there been a primary, Hoffman would be our nominee. Gingrich is WAY out of line endorsing her, and he's caught between a rock and a hard place. He can't back out now, knowing what he knows. He loses credibility. (Not like he had any serious credibility to begin with.)

So, for those complaining we're not on the Gingrich bandwagon, get over it, please. He's lost us. We can forgive the occasional transgression, but this shows us a pattern of Beltway Blues. He's happy where he is, and that's fine, but we don't need his advice on further candidates. Welcome to to the world of David Frum and Peggy Noonan. Mr. Gingrich, you're irrelevant now.

Publius II