Post CNN Debate: The Trouble With Gingrich/Romney And Conservative Reality

Republican presidential candidates from left, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Texas Congress man Ron Paul, Texas Governor Rick Perry, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, businessman Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and former Utah Governor/former U.S. Diplomat under two presidents Jon Huntsman before the CNN AEI, Heritage Foundation debate on foreign policy. Image Credit: The Heritage Foundation

By: Edmund Jenks – Politisite West Coast Editor

Just as in the process of panning for Gold, debates help to have the heavy metal collect at the bottom of the pan. The 11th debate between GOP candidates for president of the United States sponsored by CNN and two of the most recognized conservative policy institutions, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and The Heritage Foundation, helped to have the heavy Conservative metal show itself at the bottom of the pan and, on immigration, Newt’s (and by comparison – Mitt’s) metal began to pour out of the pan.

Newt Gingrich is pithy and well tested in the public arena. He generally gives great answers to many of the problems a (as polls show time and again) politically Center-Right citizen populous confronts in a Big Government world. However, when one begins to peel away the layers of a Gingrich onion, one finds a person who has made his career on governing from a “Ruling Class” and liberal position that government can and should effect people’s lives over the Rule-Of-Law, the Bill Of Rights, and the Constitution.

Let us take a simple comparison between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney on the issue of a health care system based on a government ordered, individual paid, mandate. Mitt Romney has trouble with Conservatives as being “Ruling Class” and liberal because he implemented “Romney Care” in Massachusetts that many say the Democrats based the national “Obama Care” mandated health care law on. It was only a few months ago that Newt Gingrich was comfortable with a national individual mandate for health care but Mitt Romney has always come down on the side of a States solution to health care and that a government mandate for a health care system had no place in this country. On this point, Newt was for a large federal government solution, Mitt felt that any health care solution applied to a populous, should come exclusively at the state government level – this is a more Conservative position, not great … but more Conservative.

Last night, Newt Gingrich articulated a position on immigration that may completely knock him out of the top tier of candidates for a Republican President of the United States, and rightfully so.

This excerpted and edited from Fox News –

Gingrich on Top of GOP Polls, Takes Big Risk Articulating Illegal Immigration Policy
Published November 23, 2011 |

The Republican presidential hopeful, who has sprung to the top of the polling charts in the past two weeks, warned against a policy that proposes deporting illegals who have been in the country for 25 years. Gingrich said he would not “expel” those who have come to the United States illegally if it happened decades ago.

And in an appeal to family values, he said long-residing illegal aliens shouldn’t become citizens, but neither should they be torn apart from their families.

“I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families which have been here a quarter century and I’m prepared to take the heat for saying let’s be humane in enforcing the law,” he said.
[Reference Here]

Okay, so let’s say anyone of us legal citizens did not pay their taxes for 25 years, but we were good citizens and good neighbors … would the IRS just ignore the tax laws and not prosecute us and throw us in jail?

We were guilty of breaking the law for 25 years and now we have to pay the penalty … would our family be able to join us in jail?

No, but those people who have been breaking the immigration law for 25 years, with nice families, been good neighbors, and good citizens can have their families join them when they leave the country if the current immigration laws were enforced.

In a 2007 Meet the Press interview, Mitt Romney outlined his views on illegal immigration and states the 12 million, or so, illegal immigrants should be granted citizenship (which allows for voting). During last night’s debate, Newt Gingrich, on the other hand, only advocated for legality through amnesty, not citizenship … a more Conservative position.

Without parsing, the “Gold Standard” for Center-Right voters has been, and will always be, the Rule-Of-Law, the Bill Of Rights, and the Constitution of the United States. Sadly, both Mitt Romney (with his lead in the polls, experience in business, and government leadership) and Newt Gingrich (with all of his smarts, historical Speaker of the House accomplishment/perspective, and articulatory gifts) are not members … on immigration/health care individual mandates … of the Gold Standard and should be slipping from the pan.


Up next: The CNN Debate from Arizona, sponsored by the Republican Party of Arizona – November 30, 2011.


<First published as Post CNN Debate: The Trouble With Gingrich/Romney And Conservative Reality at Technorati>

About the Author

Edmund Jenks - West Coast Editor Biography: Edmund Jenks is the Managing Editor of five Weblogs: MAXINE, Symblogogy , Oblate Spheroid, Carter’s Second Term, & notes from The EDJE. He provides consulting and relationship services and has been republished by Pajama’s Media, LATimes, Execupundit, Library Clips, Japan Only, Planet CellPhone, The Grocery List, BlogoWogo, Instapundit, PoliticalOpinions, Slate, AOLnews, WIRED, and WSJ Online …to mention a few. He’s also a Feature Page Manager for Motorsports and Feature Page Editor for Tech & Biz on NowPublic, member of the Motor Press Guild, registered citizen journalist on BlogRoll of Pajamas Media, and has appeared on Pajamas TV. Edmund Jenks has joined the Politisite team with his expertise in National Politics with a West Coast Conservative Flair. We are honored to have Ed as part of our growing portfolio of journalists and commentators.

Author Archive Page


  1. The “practical considerations” Newt, Mitt, and other ruling class lackeys suggest either give Amnesty outright, or open the door to a host of ACLU lawsuits.

    The following must be in place for at least five years, if there are still folks here who have not become a part of the legal transition, then, and only then look at what you, Newt, Mitt, and other ruling class minded types term “practical considerations”:

    Manage the border, place stiff penalties on employers … and use them, strip out civic institution magnets (welfare, drivers license, reduced or free educational tuition),  implement English as the official language of Government, and all lawsuits on behalf of non-citizens must be paid for by the complainant.

  2. The nation must confront the consequence of being lax in immigration enforcement for decades. The rule of law must be upheld, though some practical considerations must be made as the statute for enforcement eventually weakens in time and runs out. 

Post a Comment