The Election Is Over, Remember Benghazi

All bloggers I call on you to demand with me justice for Ambassador Stevens and three Americans who were killed with him in a terrorist attack that Obama knew would happen beforehand and after nearly two months later Obama has done nothing. We need to get on our blogs and begin to fight with our words. Let's join together and show the lamestream media a big portion of America hasn't forgotten Benghazi and won't let Obama just sweep it under the rug.

In college I had a professor who taught our English and Literature courses who cautioned us, “Be careful of jumping on bandwagons and following the herd. You just may find that you jumped to nowhere and following along to your own harm.” I am sure a few more took her caution to heart and realized she was talking beyond research and teaching a life lesson as well. Others I am sure let her teaching go in one hole and out another. Such is the plight of lessons, I saw the same as I taught in Japan a few years later.  The only wasted lesson is one which the student pays no heed to.

In 2008 I saw this lesson played out when Obama was hailed first as the new hope for America, then the guy who change things, then the new sensation for young women to have crushes on, then the outsider who keep the evil Clintons from retaking America, to finally the messiah who will make all things new and more importantly give away phones and other freebies. Unlike the sheeple, I decided to shun both the savior and the former sailor and go for Nader, who actually had a real record of doing something good for many and also showed real compassion that was not scripted on a teleprompter like the holy one.

Alas, I find myself now realizing the sheeple have learned nothing after four years. The proof is that we still Obama as president. The man wholly created by and sustained by the media and a team of red in tooth and claw Chicago king makers. Romney didn't stand a chance against this union of thugs and criminals, not to mention journalistic failures.

We today face the end of the United States of America as we know it. President Barack Obama, with no surprise, has been reelected. I shall not delve into why Romney lost as I have covered that before. What I shall do is inform you where our nation is headed.

Take a look at Europe and the European nations. That is our future under this president. Deep in debt and spending our way into a future of people more unemployed than employed, a currency that is worthless, and leaders more fascinated with their own persona than possessing a desire to lead. Our future is also being arranged with the fact campaigning for 2016 begins in earnest today for the Democrats. This past election splintered the Republicans and their finger pointing will be their demise four years from now. We now face the fact the UN and EU are the maps of America's future, not our constitution.

I began to get concerned when Forbes article entitled, “The Manchurian Candidate” was suddenly purged from their website. I copy and pasted the article because I knew it would not last long. Someone at the White House, you can bet, threatened Forbes with their White House press clearance if they kept it up. Valerie Jarrett comes to mind. The main focus of the article is this:

After the first three plus years of the presidency, it is painfully clear that Barack Obama was a “pretty face,” and “glib speaker” and a lightweight liberal politician with a community organizer/radical background. The American people should be outraged at this man’s behavior and even his candidacy. Why are they not? Because of the misinformation delivered by sympathetic liberal/mainstream media who loves his nonsensical form of governing.

Obama’s perceived preparedness for the presidency is a terrible delusion, from which it is difficult to escape. Mistakes build upon each other and result in even more complex problems. Difficult problems that are mishandled become even more difficult to fix. When you have too little experience, lack substance (other than the words of your latest speech), then leading, managing and problem solving simply don’t happen. And that is what has occurred. When you compound the problem by surrounding your self with like-minded theorists, lacking in real-world experience, things become worse yet. The theoretical solutions to problems often don’t work due to the messiness of the real world — and the reasons are almost unfathomable to these rookie executive/politicians.

What should Americans think about this “imposter?” Will he divulge his true background so we can all see who he is and where he came from — really? If not, is this just a man who should never have been sworn into the office of President in the first place, and who has crippled Americans miserably during his term? What if a real crisis like one involving China – either faltering or military engagement, forces Obama to make real decisions involving close to a million lives?

Will we continue to believe his misstatements (the politically correct term for lies)? Can he simply use the media to “erase and forget the past three years of misery and missteps?” Or will we learn from his imperialistic behavior and terrible results and throw him out in disgrace?

This article appeared in Forbes on March 25 and was suddenly gone a few hours later. It still survives on a few pages on the internet like Gateway Pundit .

Obama from the beginning was a manufactured bandwagon. Obama's entire autobiography was a fraud created by Chicago Democrats with tons of experience in stealing elections. Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emmanuel, David Axelrod all created the myth and fiction that is Barack Obama. The very reason that this administration opposes any laws that will make voter fraud difficult - the Democrats had to oppose them to fulfill their goals for America. With voters having to prove their identities, ACORN and others can't help Democrats seal wins on their own, they need election fraud.

The heir to the Obama dynasty has already been chosen and campaigning begins today. Hillary survived Obama throwing her under the bus on Benghazi, and it is certain little will be revealed or done about Benghazi, the dialogue will shift, perhaps. The dialogue and goal of this administration will be their “reshaping and redirection of America, and spreading wealth around”. Maybe congress will humor Obama and let him have his way on things. Taking example from European nations Obama will transform the US economy into the Keynesian paradise that Paul Krugman and other leftists are pushing for. Regulations on business will pose too great a burden and force them to nationalize.

All the while knowing Socialism is failing Europe and the UK's system is near collapse. That makes no difference to Obama, he will continue to push his American “transformation”. Logic and sense have no place in Obama's plans, the very fact he demands American Socialism is enough, and the proof has been in his willingness to sacrifice lives to accomplish this. Remember the names of Brian Terry, Ambassador Chris Stevens, they were sacrificed by Obama to push his agenda forward, American lives are of no consequence to his thirst for wealth, power, and implementing his Socialist agenda on America. This new term for Obama seals the deal.

Now the petty bickering of Axelrod vs Holder can be put to rest. It really does not matter if Holder resigns now or not. Obama has nothing to fear if his entire cabinet and pool of advisers leave. Valerie Jarrett is guaranteed to stay gate keeper so long as Obama occupies the Oval Office. Jarrett can begin in earnest her promised letting hell loose on the perceived enemies and under achievers of Obama. Jarrett can unleash her worst and there in nobody and nothing to stand in her way. After all, we now know Obama called off killing Bin Laden three times at Jarrett's demand, and Jarrett is actually the one who gave the go ahead to Seal Team 6 in May 2011, so much for the Obama the terrorist slayer monicker. With Obama's apologetics and his penchant to refuse to use the words terrorist and terrorism, the monicker was more sarcastic anyway.

Now Obama can sit back and groom Hillary to be his successor. Bill Clinton was unable to convince Hillary to stage a coup this year, so now Bill can look forward to being first husband in 2016. The only things that will hinder this are: Hillary decides not to run (perhaps), the Benghazi ordeal blasts the Obama administration into chaos after inquiries (unlikely, there is no interest now the election is over), or Obama commits random acts of self destruction like Carter did (impossible, he survived the first term, and Jarrett is much more intelligent than Hamilton Jordan). Obama can now push his agenda for America's reshaping and spread the wealth around like he wishes now.

There still could be a fly in the ointment. Suppose China falls into chaos due to ethnic uprising or the Islamist regimes China has been bankrolling turn against the godless Chinese communists and launch jihad on China. Either are completely possible. The gulf between rural poverty and urban expansion have widened tremendously the last seven years. Today the vast majority in China live in deeper poverty and even less chance to rise out of poverty. This is a ticking time bomb that the elite in Beijing pretend does not exist, yet know perfectly well that the tiniest spark could set off ethnic tensions that would lead the 80% caught in rural poverty to rise up. This was narrowly averted twice already. After the 2008 Western China Earthquake and the 2009 Uighur Uprisings. A third spark just may set off the powder keg.

If this happens (and it is a real possibility) Obama would be caught absolutely in shock. Clinton's State Dept. would be even more unprepared than it was for Benghazi. Obama and his drones have been band wagoning Chinese ascension to number one, and anything that stood in the way would come as a complete surprise they could not handle. The fall of China as we know it now would throw Obama's team into such chaos that Republicans could retake a majority in both houses of congress in 2014 and also have a real chance to take the White House in 2016.

China has been trumpeted as the inheritor to America's greatness for so long by the leftists like Obama that a failure for China to do so would throw economic plans, diplomatic relations, and the balance of power in Asia in complete chaos. There is a real chance that China could actually find itself a splintered third world nation before ever reaching number one. Even if China reaches number one, how long could they stay there with the poverty, disparity, and privation that actually exist in China? I have always stated there is no guarantee China will either keep its prosperity or rise any further. For the simple fact that China's success like Obama's autobiography are media generated and advanced myths. A closer look makes both fail serious inspection. There was a reason that Forbes article was titled “The Manchurian Candidate”, a real crisis bigger than the Arab Spring or Benghazi will topple Obama's success and throw the Democrats into a tailspin.

Now consider this final thought. Obama has been reelected and Congress has gained more Republicans. The Benghazi affair is much, much bigger than Watergate was. Obama will now go through the same sad process that Richard Nixon went through after he won his second term. Now that Obama has a second term there will be no way that the lame-stream media could or can whitewash the cover-up that has been committed by the Obama administration in handling Benghazi.

The Benghazi investigation will pre-occupy Congress for the next two years of Obama’s second term and will bring down his sorry administration in impeachment proceedings in the House and trial in the Senate. Republicans do not need majorities of both houses of Congress, it will be a slam-dunk. The corrupt White House team lead by Valerie Jarrett will fight it tooth-and-nail, and the complicit and corrupt lame-stream media will continue to support the corrupt POTUS and his corrupt administration, however, justice will prevail in the end because as in 1974, the American people will finally demand something be done to right the injustice, lies, and criminality emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

So perhaps Obama may have been better off losing. China would be dealt with by Romney and his brain trust of a Bush IV team. Benghazi could have easily been swept under the rug and kept there. Now that Obama has won a second term it all rests in his lap. Like Nixon, Obama has been glib, smug, and arrogant, those are dangerous traits for a leader. Like Nixon, Obama's second win could be his colossal failure. Be careful of jumping on bandwagons indeed, especially if they are marked China or Obama. Congratulations Mr. President.

A Response to Obama's Marxist Leaning

Obama Is No Marxist - I Know For A Fact

By Daniel J. Rea

I take much amusement hearing right wing radio hosts spew their piffle about President Obama being a Marxist.  First, there is absolutely no evidence to prove this ridiculous accusation.  Their guilt by association of a few people Obama spoke with in the past is dangerous because I can show all these radio hosts can be homosexuals, Nazis, and conspirators to defraud the USA.  Second, they seem to not understand what a Marxist is by definition, and Obama does not meet the definition.  Just because he supports universal health care (which Obama Care is not – this simply requires all Americans to have health insurance, private or government) does not make him a Marxist any more than it did Truman, JFK, Eisenhower, Johnson, Ford, Ted Kennedy, Bob Dole, John Tower, or Bill Clinton (all of these people called for public supported government sponsored health care).  Finally, because I had been a Marxist and Obama by no means qualifies like the people I knew and associated with in the CPUSA.

The definition of a Marxist is a person who follows Karl Marx or his theories.  Problem is, Obama does neither.  Obama has never praised Karl Marx nor has Obama followed the theories of Marx.  Quite the opposite actually, Obama has praised the need for private property, helped bail out the auto makers to keep them going instead of nationalizing them, and Obama has repeatedly spoke of the need to preserve America’s capitalist system.  Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin simply won’t let a little thing like the truth hinder them though.  Instead because President Obama met Bill Ayers, was inspired by his professor Charles Ogletree, and worked with ACORN organizer Madeleine Talbott then Obama is Marxist by association.  Even if these people were to be Marxists, which it is doubtful about Ogletree and Talbott, it would not make Obama a Marxist because he knew them or even worked with them.

Many of us know or work with drug addicts (actually Limbaugh is an addict) that does not make us addicts.  Many of us know and work with mentally ill people, that does not make us mentally ill.  Guilt by association is a logical fallacy for a reason, it is ridiculous.  So let’s play the guilty by association game.  By this logic Rush Limbaugh is a homosexual because he associated with homosexuals Eliot Sanders and Norm Woodruff.  Sean Hannity is a Nazi because he associated with well-known Neo-Nazi Hal Turner.  Mark Levin is guilty of perjury because he associates with Oliver North.  That is how ridiculous it is for these petty little charlatans to call our president a Marxist.  These hate prattlers have no shame or decency.

There is a more full definition of a Marxist: One who supports the complete control of private property that is then made communal to gain complete control of labor and capital for adjudication by the collective state.  This definition comes from the Merriam – Webster Dictionary.  Obama fails by this definition because Obama repeatedly has called for the preservation of private property rights.  A big reason he nixed the pipeline deal.  He didn’t want people losing their farm, ranch, and business property to make room for it.  Something the neo-Cons intentionally do not mention.  Obama has not made any comment nor drafted any legislation that would put all employment or money under control of the state.  Instead Obama has drafted legislation that eases employment policies and laws so people can be more easily employed.  Every US bank could have easily been collectivized by Obama just hours after January 20, 2009.

Obama did away with restrictions on who can be classified as a trainee for heavy industry jobs and Obama even pissed off many unions over the summer when he said in Kansas, “I believe unions control employment in some jobs they have no need controlling.”  Obama fails as a Marxist by this more complete definition.  Those who call Obama a Marxist are full of shit, plain and simple.

Honestly, if one wishes to dislike the Obama presidency there are numerous reasons.  One, Obama’s pathological promise breaking.  The deficit is not cut in half yet.  Obama has not created the millions of jobs he promised.  There is no foreclosure protection agency.  Two, one could also look at his failed policies.  Obama’s Mid-east policies have failed.  Egypt is moving closer to Islamist control.  Syria continues to ignore Obama and the State Department.  Iran refuses to talk to Obama or Sec. of State Clinton.  Obama’s presidency is the biggest failure since that of Jimmy Carter’s, there is simply no need to falsely label Obama as Marxist.  Three, the absolute refusal of Obama to submit a budget to Congress.

I know firsthand Obama is not a Marxist because I used to be a Marxist.  I associated with people who hated capitalism and were willing to do almost anything to bring down the US government.  When the Soviet Union fell we fell apart as American Marxists.  The CPUSA crawled into a shell that it will never be able to escape, especially after 9/11.  There was nothing to hold to because Marxism had proven a huge failure.  Today, the Marxists I knew who stayed on with the movement are pathetic imitations of their former selves.  If I were still a Marxist I would definitely be against Obama and his half assed policies that have further wrecked our nation at the price of the suffering of the poor.  What Obama actually wants is for the US to be a nanny state like the European states are.  A cheap Euro Socialist imposter that joins hands with Socialist Europe and redistributes the world’s wealth until Ayn Rand is seen as a prophet and not the dime store novel writer she was.

Obviously Obama isn’t noticing the miserable failure Europe’s experiment with Socialism is.  There is wide difference between Socialism and Marxism.  The UK was a Socialist state through much of the Cold War but stood against Soviet Marxism.  Some dumb asses in the Lamestream Media forget real history and just like to throw labels and names around.  Personally, I always thought if Europe wanted to solve all of their problems then they should stop screwing around and become real Marxist states.  That helped the Soviets because when it all fell apart they became more capitalist and republican than the US is.  There is much that can be criticized of Obama, but calling him a Marxist is like calling the Pope an Atheist.  The label just does not fit.

 Obama is obviously an Uncle Tom for big industry.  Look at his handling of BP, his recent refusal to have Google’s privacy policy checked by the FTC and FCC for consumer privacy violations, and his acceptance of election donations by huge insurance, energy, and technology corporations.  Obama is as much a big industry ass kisser as Regan and Bush I and II were.  That is a far cry from being Marxist.  My Marxist friends would eat Obama for lunch and shit him out for dinner.  They have absolutely no respect for a man who pretends to be friends of the poor while kissing the asses of the likes of Warren Buffet, Jeremiah Wright, and Tony Hayward.  Oh well, to each according to need and from each according to ability to lie in the Lamestream Media. 

I miss those days some times.  In the end we were no more than middle class suburban kids looking to be different from the soulless neocons around us.  We had a penchant for Toyota, Edie Brickell, and Mondale.  Our neocon classmates had a penchant for BMW, Tom Petty, and Reagan.  We wanted nothing to do with them.  Some of us grew out of it and others stayed in the “Party” and were in central Dallas over the summer Occupying Old City Park.  To those comrades I say with teary eyed nostalgia and fondness, the revolution is past.  Now occupy a job.

Daniel Rea is a good friend of mine and sent me this in an email.  I reprint it here with approved editing as a response to my previous post. 

Romney Can't Beat Obama After South Carolina

Republican hopeful Mitt Romney will have two big problems if, as expected, he clinches the Republican nomination for the November election: his business background and Hispanic voters.

While most of the media focus on the first, Romney's biggest problem will be the second.

Right now, political pundits in Washington are focusing on Romney's past as former head of Bain Capital, the private equity firm that critics -- including fellow Republican contender Newt Gingrich -- say raided corporations and laid off thousands of workers during his tenure.

The Obama campaign is already salivating at the possibility of using this line of attack against Romney in November. At a time when jobs are the No. 1 U.S. problem, and when Romney presents himself as a successful private sector leader who could turn around the economy, depicting Romney as a job destroyer would go to the heart of the Republican campaign's narrative.

But the former Massachusetts governor may be able to fend off attacks on his performance at Bain Capital by convincing voters that he created more jobs than he eliminated, and that most of the companies he took over ended up healthier than before. That will be a my-figures-versus-your-figures debate, which may very well end in a draw that would neutralize the Democrats' job-killer campaign.

On the other hand, winning over the Hispanic vote will be a much tougher battle for Romney, because it will be a fight that will take place in the realm of people's emotions, which are much harder to twist than facts.

A November poll of Latino voters by the Univisión network found that Romney does not fare well among Hispanics. The poll showed that if the elections were held today, Obama would beat Romney by 67 percent to 24 percent.

The conventional wisdom among pollsters is that no Republican candidate can win the White House with less than 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. Former President George W. Bush won the 2004 election with 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. In the 2008 elections, Republican candidate Sen. John McCain, a moderate on immigration issues, got 31 percent of the Hispanic vote, and lost the election.

Will Romney be able to win 40 percent of the Hispanic vote when, in his efforts to win the extreme right of the Republican party in the nomination process, he has taken much harder-line stands than McCain did in 2008? It will be very difficult for him to do it, most pollsters say.

In sharp contrast to McCain in the last election, Romney is strongly against an immigration reform that would give a path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants who have lived here for decades and meet certain conditions such as learning English and paying back taxes. He also strongly opposes the Dream Act, which would allow undocumented youths who were brought to this country as small children to earn legal status if they go to college or join the military.

While immigration doesn't rank at the top of Hispanic voters' concerns, candidates' stands on immigration tend to mold their feelings toward politicians, and Romney's harsh rhetoric against undocumented workers during the recent debates have left many Latinos feeling, "this guy doesn't like us."

My opinion: If there are no surprises and Romney wins the Republican nomination, he will need to make a dramatic move to win the Hispanic vote. Moderating his rhetoric or stressing that his father was born in Mexico -- where his family of Mormon missionaries had moved -- won't suffice. There is just too much TV footage of the Republican presidential hopeful coming across as bashing Hispanic undocumented workers and their children.

There is speculation that Romney could choose Florida Sen. Marco Rubio as his running mate, in hopes of capturing the Latino vote. But that won't work. Rubio is against a comprehensive immigration reform, opposes the Dream Act and has supported Arizona's draconian immigration law. Except for Cuban-Americans, he is unlikely to be seen by most Hispanics as "one of us."

Romney's best bet would be to pick former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is popular in Florida and would help the Republicans win the state, speaks fluent Spanish, is married to a Mexican and is much more moderate than Romney and Rubio on immigration issues.

Barring a daring move like that, Romney can't beat Obama. Right now only a worsening economy can beat Obama.

Obama Takes Millions In Corporate Donations

Don't let Obama fool you, he takes in millions from corporate donations.  While Obama plays to his base preaching against capitalism and against private business, Obama is more than willing to take money from those big, bad, and corrupt corporate elite.  Don't be fooled either about this, Obama is worth millions in personal wealth.  So with all this being the facts is it fair he takes off to Hawaii on a private vacation for three weeks when so many Americans are unemployed?  Is it fair Michelle spends hundreds of thousands on designer cloths in Paris, not just from Paris, but actually in Paris with so many Americans are in desperate conditions?  As usual as a good Marxist lefty Obama says one thing then does another.

As reported in The Wall Street Journal:

President Barack Obama, who has been characterized as anti-business by his political opponents, has received more in campaign contributions from business executives this year than any Republican presidential candidate.

Obama raised $5.6 million from executives, or about a third of all their donations through Sept. 30, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Republican candidate Mitt Romney raised $5.2 million, far outpacing his primary challengers. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the front-runner in the latest national polls, raised about $272,000, or 5 percent of Romney’s total.

The findings illustrate the powers of an incumbent president with an established fundraising apparatus, and the diversity of political preferences among business leaders. Executives from communications and technology firms led Obama’s donor list. Romney’s professional ties to the private-equity fund Bain Capital LLC, which he founded, fueled his receipts.

Though Obama has criticized the excesses of Wall Street financial firms and their executives, he always has had “a large donor component that was linked to corporate America,” David Magleby, a political scientist and visiting scholar at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, said in an interview.

Penny Pritzker, a Chicago billionaire businesswoman and chairman of Pritzker Realty Group LLC, led Obama’s fundraising efforts in 2008. Matthew Barzun, a former CNET Networks Inc. executive, leads fundraising for Obama’s re-election campaign.

We Need Gingrich As President

Our nation is being suffocated with debt and its citizens crushed by the repetition of failed policies. America must end the insanity coming out of Washington and begin the road to recovery by defeating President Obama on Nov. 6, 2012.

The most important election of our lifetime is now less than a year away. As Iowans, we have the great responsibility in choosing the next president of the United States. We have the unique and privileged opportunity to speak with presidential candidates personally. I have been fortunate enough to meet with the entire slate of 2012 Republican candidates on more than one occasion. This election cycle in particular, Republicans should all be proud of the tremendous depth our candidates display as they compete for our party's nomination.

We have seen the consequences of electing politicians who lack experience and leadership. To return America back to prosperity, we need a leader with experience implementing bold solutions. We need a leader who has shown that they know how to get America working again.  That leader is Newt Gingrich.

Unlike the current administration, Newt is not blind to the difficulties facing our nation in this perilous time. The 21st Century Contract with America shows a deep understanding of the scale and scope of the problems facing America. Under Gingrich's leadership as speaker, Congress passed the first balanced budget in a generation. In four years, Gingrich oversaw the creation of a stable economic environment that created 11 million jobs, while reforming welfare programs, restoring funding to strengthen our defense capabilities, expanding NIH research programs, and repaying over $400 billion in federal debt.

Putting Americans back to work needs to be the administration's highest priority. 

While our current administration disagrees, a Gingrich administration will ensure that America's focus on job-creation never waivers. Instead of baseless rhetoric and empty promises, Newt has practical and innovative ideas to solve some of our toughest problems. Nothing will help our deficit or protect our future more soundly than transitioning Americans from a government-dependent economy to an independently productive economy.

Newt himself is the torchbearer for the growth agenda in the 2012 elections. He will not divide America and try to bring all of us down to the same level. He will set our sights on an America that encourages all people to rise and rewards all who do rise. Toward that end, Newt Gingrich is offering the most exciting, Reaganesque, pro-growth plan of any candidate. Moreover, should not the principal question of 2012 be: Can America afford anything less than the strongest strategy for growth in today’s precarious global economy?

We know what President Reagan’s program enabled the American people to accomplish: 17 million new jobs, 92 straight months of above-average growth and $15 trillion in new wealth, producing a $4,000 increase in real median family income, better than before or after the Reagan years. While the deficit rose early on, by the end of his term, thanks to powerful growth in the economy, it had fallen to 2.9% of GDP, a fraction of today’s deficit.

Just imagine what America could accomplish with the Gingrich Plan: with real spending restraints, real regulatory reform and a strong dollar, a 12.5% corporate tax rate, equaling Ireland’s near-lowest in the world, 100% expensing, an optional 15% flat tax, zero tax on capital gains and inheritances, an all-out drive for American energy and the choice of personal Social Security accounts for young people. Logic compels us to believe that with these bold solutions, Americans will once again surpass expectations and shock the world.

The journey to restore America must begin with limiting government, as well as empowering and ennobling every individual. We not only empower but we ennoble when we honor the dignity, worth and potential of every person, born and unborn. We are not subjects of any elites, we are citizens, each born with a purpose and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights. This is what Newt Gingrich believes. This is the idea he has fought for throughout his public life. This is why he has stood in the line of fire, again and again, on behalf of Ronald Reagan and the conservative cause. More than any other candidate, Newt Gingrich has won decisive victories, and can again, for individuals and families, and for a freer, stronger, more prosperous America at home and in the world.