Newt Gingrich... Anti-Conservative as Well as Anti-American and Anti-Liberty

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The holiday season is upon us. For those more conventionally inclined, and not intimidated by the PC Police (that would definitely be me) the season is best known as the Christmas Season.

Sorry all you over sensitive anal atheists (and that from a tolerant atheist), please stuff a nice big Christmas stocking in your over bloated and insensitive blow holes.

That aside, preceding what will be my last post prior to December 26th, Rational Nation USA wants to wish all its readership A Very Merry Christmas and A Happy and Prosperous New Year.

Please drink responsibly, and use a designated driver whenever common sense dictates.

Moving forward... In the interest of providing clarity Rational Nation USA can no longer represent itself as a conservative site. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, I didn't leave the republican party and conservatism, rather the republican party and conservatism has left me. As unfortunate and uncomfortable as that may be it is objective reality.

This development I suppose leaves me a man without a political home. When squared against the alternative however it is not such a bad place to be. I remain a man who knows and understands his principles. One who refuses to carry water for any party or ideology. Standing for right is, in the final determination, far more important than winning when winning requires sacrificing your soul. To crib Ayn Rand, that means sacrificing your independent objective mind. Or put another way it means sacrificing your principles in the support of a lesser of  two evils.

I think I'll pass and continue my advocacy for classical liberalism. For those wondering what the difference between modern liberalism, and or modern conservatism is from classical liberalism I suggest a visit to a website such as Wikipedia, any reputable Encyclopedia, or a good Dictionary. The rest is up to you.

George Will is a man whose positions I do not always agree with. He is however a thoughtful and intelligent man. I was pleased to come upon his recent article calling out so called conservative presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich for his blatantly anti-conservative, indeed anti-republican views on the judiciary.

This sites position on the Newt's statist, indeed his almost fascist like positions is well known. With his most recent statements that congressional police ought to be able to arrest judges whose views essentially differ from congressional views is extremely frightening as well as dangerous.

George Will is spot on in his analysis of  Newt, the would be dictator's  position with respect to the judiciary.

(The Washington Post) When discussing his amazingness, Newt Gingrich sometimes exaggerates somewhat, as when, discussing Bosnia and Washington, D.C., street violence, he said, “People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz” [Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jan. 16, 1994]. What primarily stands between us and misrule, however, is the Constitution, buttressed by an independent judiciary.

But Gingrich’s hunger for distinction has surely been slaked by his full-throated attack on such a judiciary. He is the first presidential candidate to propose a thorough assault on the rule of law. That is the meaning of his vow to break courts to the saddle of politicians, particularly to members of Congress, who rarely even read the laws they pass.

Gingrich’s most lurid evidence that courts are “grotesquely dictatorial” is a Texas judge’s aggressive decision concerning religious observances at high school functions, a decision a higher court promptly (and dictatorially?) overturned. Gingrich’s epiphany about judicial tyranny occurred in 2002, when a circuit court ruled unconstitutional the Pledge of Allegiance phrase declaring America a nation “under God.” Gingrich likened this to the 1857 Dred Scott decision that led to 625,000 Civil War dead. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned the circuit court’s “under God” nonsense.

So, Gingrich is happy? Not exactly. He warns that calling the Supreme Court supreme amounts to embracing “oligarchy.”

He says that the Founders considered the judiciary the “weakest” branch. Not exactly. Alexander Hamilton called the judiciary the “least dangerous” branch (Federalist 78) because, since it wields neither the sword nor the purse, its power resides solely in persuasive “judgment.” That, however, is not weakness but strength based on the public’s respect for public reasoning. Gingrich yearns to shatter that respect and trump such reasoning with raw political power, in the name of majoritarianism. {Read More}

There can be little doubt but what the classical liberal thinkers, those individuals instrumental in founding our great nation and in the process changing history, are rolling over in their graves {if that were possible} witnessing the likes of one Newtie Gingrich vying for the most powerful office in the free world.

While I cannot support the likes of any of the republican candidates {Ron Paul excluded} currently arrayed the the Circus Tent of Elephants I can say this. For those who cannot bring themselves to support any alternative to the statist republican nominee for president cast your ballot for Mitt Romney in the primaries. While he may be a statist, just as  Obama is, at least he is not a anti-constitutional idiot like the Newtie.

Footnote: I speak only  for myself and for no other individual.  Nor do I speak for anyone's political organization.

Via: Memeorandum