According to some pundits, including establishment conservative George Will [see This Week, today], what we see with Gingrich's impressive victory in SC is a clear choice for Gingrich by the down-scale, evangelical, hyper-conservative, rural foks. On the othe hand we have Romney, who appeals to so-called establishment conservatives, up-scale secular voters, moderates, and in particular, Wall Street. According to George Will, Republican politicians from dog catchers to Senators, woke up all over the country this morning and thought, "My God, this man could be the leader of the party!". Will even expresses grave concern that this could be the man who would have his finger on the nuclear trigger. There is also concern that Gingrich could cost the Republicans the House "by doing something stupid".

This has been a long time in coming. But now the Republicans will have admit to their true identity. Is this the tea party, or something else? If something else, what?

Isn't it ironic that one of the people who was there when the legislation for the economic catastrophe and recession that has happened is now the front runner in the Republican party. Gingrich was there when bills were passed that helped fuel the fire of fraud, deception and manipulation by the entire financial community.

Read this if you need enlightenment:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2011%2F05%2F29% 2Fbooks%2Freview%2Fbook-review-reckless-endangerment-by-gretchen-morgenson-and-joshua-rosner.html%3Fpagewanted%3Dall&ei=hj0dT_XiPMq02gW3idzsCw&usg=AFQjCNE1Q0ynmfVmK44lLIodeYP_L4iHCw&sig2=qVN4rLzz-FSP13kIlLYfKw

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/401080_363608936999590_100000514600710_1513985_131 0162216_n.jpg

Isn't it ironic that one of the people who was there when the legislation for the economic catastrophe and recession that has happened is now the front runner in the Republican party. Gingrich was there when bills were passed that helped fuel the fire of fraud, deception and manipulation by the entire financial community.

Read this if you need enlightenment:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2011%2F05%2F29% 2Fbooks%2Freview%2Fbook-review-reckless-endangerment-by-gretchen-morgenson-and-joshua-rosner.html%3Fpagewanted%3Dall&ei=hj0dT_XiPMq02gW3idzsCw&usg=AFQjCNE1Q0ynmfVmK44lLIodeYP_L4iHCw&sig2=qVN4rLzz-FSP13kIlLYfKw

Nope,
Repeal of the Glass Stegal Act occurred in the 106th congress after Newt had left.


The bill then moved to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November.[10][13] On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8,[14][note 4] and by the House 362-57.[15][note 5] The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.[16]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act

Similarly the pressure applied to Fannie Mae was after that as well.


In 1999, Fannie Mae came under pressure from the Clinton administration to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977.[18] Additionally, institutions in the primary mortgage market pressed Fannie Mae to ease credit requirements on the mortgages it was willing to purchase, enabling them to make loans to subprime borrowers at interest rates higher than conventional loans.[18]
In 1999, The New York Times reported that with the corporation's move towards the subprime market "Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae

Newt's got enough baggage. No need to pile on things he wasn't responsible for.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/401080_363608936999590_100000514600710_1513985_131 0162216_n.jpg

Funny, I consider five of those claims favorable [well, at least four... I don't know anything about the Congressional candidate he supported]. Being that I'm an Independent, that can't be all bad for Gingrich. It would help him in a general election. But that is the problem the Republicans have now. If you can get nominated, you probably couldn't win an election!

It looks like Wall Street is getting the upper hand. So if Wall Street [Romney] wins, will the tea party and evangelicals show up on election day?

I'm still wondering about a third party bid. Perhaps it is time for the tea party to break ranks and go it alone.