The big lie going on during the last couple of days is the idea that Newt Gingrich is just as progressive as Mitt Romney. From Glenn Beck to Ace of Spades to commenters here. Pure garbage.
First let me admit that I am leaning Newt mainly because I am a anybody but Romney guy. If Rick Perry or Rick Santorum could somehow become relevant by the time my Florida primary comes around I will probably switch to them. However, if it becomes a Newt vs Mitt vote my decision will be easy. I will vote for the conservative, Newt Gingrich.
Let me admit Newt has many flaws. From his personal life baggage, to his ego, to his unpopularity from the past, to even some of the issues he has pushed. There are some things people can and should bring up to complain about Newt. This is all fair game and true.
However, when people even remotely insinuate that there is no difference between Newt and Mitt on the conservative-progressive spectrum, they are either lying or are stupid.
During the 90's, Mitt would have been rated at or near the bottom of conservatism in the Republican party. And Newt would have been at or near the extreme right of that scale. Newt was the face of the conservative movement in elected office along with probably Jessie Helms. Newt had a 90+ ACU rating in his 20 year career. He helped come up with the conservative Contract with America. At the other end was Mitt Romney who was against the Contract with America and who stated "I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." even though 60% of America voted for Reagan-Bush.
Then when push came to shove and it was time to actually govern, Newt had Welfare Reform, budgets balanced, and governments shut down. And Mitt had Romneycare. You say that was the past. I would simply ask who has sounded more conservative between the two during the debates? For me it has been Newt Gingrich.
Finally we get to my main point. People are bringing up about a dozen issues to point at Newt being a progressive. This is largely cherry picking certain votes, comments, and issues. He has probably pushed 1000 issues, voted on 5,000, and commented on 10,000. Who wouldn't have some bad moves? When you have been a Speaker of the House of course you have compromised on occasion. You are bound to have a liberal-progressive vote or two in 20 years in congress. When you have written 23 books, worked with numerous groups to push ideas and been a talking head on Fox News for nearly a decade, of course you will go too far to the left once or twice or even ten times.
In comparison, other then be a Governor for 4 years and done a few interviews and the debates, Mitt Romney hides. There isn't anywhere near the record to nit pick Mitt.
My simple question that I have yet to hear an answer for is what has Mitt ever accomplished that was truly conservative in his entire life? I have asked this at numerous sites. Have not seen a good answer yet. What has he even spent a dime of political capital on to try and accomplish that was conservative? When did he EVER fight for conservatism? Is he even truly doing that today? Give me even one example? When has the media ever gone after Mitt for doing something conservative?
Newt is a very conservative Republican who has lately on rare occasion dabbled in the dark side. I think in some cases to make money. In some cases to get in a little better with the establishment. However, Mitt is in bed with the establishment and has consummated that relationship with a child to show for it[Romneycare].
The media has never gone after Mitt Romney because Mitt is a liberal-progressive saying what people want to hear right now. Mitt will NEVER fight for conservatism. Newt has many times, including in the last debate even[Palestine]. I am still waiting for Mitt to do it once in his life.