Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Devvy
Articles:

Vote Fraud: What They Aren't Telling You

Forced Mental Health Screening for Your Children


More
Devvy
Articles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHO IS THE REAL NEWT GINGRICH?
PART 1 of 2

 

 

By: Devvy
June 15, 2009
2009 - NewsWithViews.com

[I am traveling right now and can't do new columns while on the road. I pulled this one from my CD because Gingrich has fooled people for a long, long time. If Americans continue to support the same people who have taken us to the point of collapse, nothing will change. Make no mistake about it: Gingrich is a one world government advocate. This article was written in February, 1996. By necessity, it is two parts.]

It always amazes me how otherwise intelligent people will put party loyalty above their commitment to God, flag and country. I have been a Republican all my life except when I ran for Congress in 1994 and that hiatus was strictly for the election. I am a Republican because I believe in our Republic. I do not pledge loyalty for any individual in the Republican party if that individual introduces, supports or passes unconstitutional legislation and sells out this country to this proposed New World Order.

One of the goals of my Project on Winning Economic Reform and my bid for Congress is to bring out the truth about how certain programs, i.e. social security, the FED, the IRS and so on, are set up and why they don't work. Equally important, is bringing forth ideas for solutions and then running for office so we can bring these solutions forward.

It's very frustrating when you spend a great deal of time explaining all of this, providing factual documentation which supports the truth, and then have people simply ignore this truth and continue to support the same people who support these unconstitutional, programs bringing America to financial ruin -just because that individual is a mucky- muck in their party or their incumbent. Very frustrating.

On January 12, 1996, Mr. Gingrich came to Redding, California to raise money for my opponent, Walter Herger- Eight hundred people paid $125.00 per person to hear his spin; Mr. Herger got a hundred thousand dollars from his cohort and supporter of the New World Order. It's difficult to try and explain to folks just what the problem is with people like Dole, Gingrich, Herger, Gephardt, Clinton, Feinstein and so on if people don't want to hear the truth. These individuals, through their actions, all support the destruction of America. Their rhetoric is structured to meet the needs of whatever audience they are pandering to.

How can we determine whether a duly elected public servant is really doing the right thing for America and not for his own power? Through his voting record. It's that simple. Not by listening to his speeches, not by 15-second sound bites on TV but through his voting record. In the case of Mr. Clinton, the media kept all his illegal activities and shenanigans a secret so that Americans only got 15 second sound bites. Had the media told the truth, this immoral individual and his equally immoral wife would not be the Presidents of the United States.

Mr. Gingrich struts around like he's Thomas Jefferson. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Our illustrious speaker almost lost his last primary election and the election itself. Five Democrats and more importantly, five Republicans on the House Ethics Committee unanimously voted to appoint an Independent Counsel to look into his GOPAC activities - most notably, the channeling of those funds into his 1990 primary. You see, he almost lost that primary too.

Many individuals who participate in my Project On Winning Economic Reform live in Cobb County, Marietta, Georgia, Gingrich's district. I have received a mountain of information on him and his voting record. The media has created this image that Gingrich is the quintessential conservative, yet nothing could be farther from the truth. I'll let you be the judge after you read the rest of this article.

Now this may not sit well with conservative Republicans who are desperately seeking leadership, but the facts are the facts. It's not that I dislike Gingrich. I've never met him. What I don't like is the way he votes and what he supports, period.

It's nice to belong to a political party. It's a good thing to be active in your local community on the grassroots level, working for a better America for all. However, when party loyalty to individuals who do not uphold their oath of office and are selling America down the road, becomes more important than loyalty to God, flag and country, it become s destructive. This type of blind loyalty is not in anyone's best interests, least of all for our country. lt may also split the vote in 1996 if Dole or Gramm wins the GOP nomination, and tragically, would put this Marxist back in the White House for another four years.

The New American magazine, a very conservative publication, published a story on Mr. Gingrich last year. This article is quite accurate and I feel deserves a good airing for Republicans. There are 79 freshmen Republican men and women in the House [Congress]. They are going to be our only salvation in keeping a steady course. As yet, they haven't started to expose the core truth, but I honestly feel if another 35-50 constitutionalists are elected this year, collectively, as a whole, they will make the move against the Federal Reserve. God willing, I will be one of them.

Reprinted with permission. The New American - December 12, 1994, Copyright 1994 - American Opinion Publishing, Inc., P.O. Box 8040, Appleton, Wisconsin 54913. Subscriptions: $39.00/year (26 issues)

Title : Speaking for Whom? By author William F. Jasper

Subtitle: Can A New Age, CFR functionary lead the Conservative Advance?

"Fire breather," "bomb thrower," "the man most Democrats consider the devil incarnate," "the guerrilla leader of Congress' Republican insurgents," "McCarthyite," "bulldog extremist." These are some of the nice epithets that have been hurled at Rep. Newton Leroy Gingrich, the Republican minority whip from Georgia's 6th Congressional District who is expected to be replacing Tom Foley as Speaker of the House in the lO4th Congress.

To judge from the furious invective he inspires from sputtering Democrat polls and media liberals, this man must be far indeed "to the right of Attila the Hun." Barely a day after the seismic shift of November 8th that swept the GOP to power in Congress and in state houses across the land, Mr. Gingrich had liberal punditdom frothing in high dungeon for referring to Bill and Hillary Clinton as "counterculture McGoverniks" and to their White House staff as a bunch of "left-wing elitists." Even worse, he charged that Clinton Democrats are the "enemy of normal Americans" and the party of "total bizarreness,, total weirdness."

The Vision Thing

To millions of Americans, of course, Gingrich's words were merely accentuating verbally what they had already so powerfully expressed with their votes. And the media reaction was not only delicious icing on the cake, but proof that their new champion had hit the mark. An arrogant, imperial President and an equally contemptuous Congress intent on imposing homosexuals on the military, pushing condoms to grade school children, disposing of the Second Amendment, taxing families into extinction, gutting national defense, regulating businesses to death, spending the nation into oblivion, and entangling America in one UN military operation after another had been resoundingly repudiated in one of the most severe political massacres of modern times. And the victors, who had been scorned and excoriated as nuts, malcontents, and "religious extremists," had earned the right to crow - something Gingrich does with unmatched flair.

But Newt Gingrich is also a capable exponent of "the vision thing." In a policy address on November 1lth at Washington's Willard Hotel, Gingrich delivered the conservative/populist message that many Americans wanted to hear, declaring that he was going to pursue the goal of "disciplined, smaller, more frugal government" - with a vengeance. "One of the reasons the American people are so fed up with the current political structure," he charged, "is that they think they send a strong signal on election day and they watch it gradually dribble away in Washington, with all the people in Washington finding excuses not to do what they've [been] asked to do." Amen.

And the signal the American people were sending, he said, was "based on a pretty clear direction of less government, less regulation, less interference, and lower taxes, not just at the federal level, but at virtually every level across the country in virtually every state..."

Liberal columnist David S. Broder was suitably impressed by the address, calling it "a policy speech that was confident, coherent, and in every way impressive. The words were strong, the thoughts were clear, and no one who heard him was in any doubt that the House Republicans he leads will attempt to enact the conservative governing agenda he described."

Whoa there, Mr. Broder, speak for yourself. For those who were listening closely, there was more than one agenda described. And for those familiar with history, with politicians in general, and with Newt Gingrich in particular, there was plenty of cause for doubt - and concern.

The GATT Man

Chief and most immediate among those doubts and concerns is Gingrich's zealous commitment to helping President Clinton secure congressional approval of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization [GATT/WTO] accord. When asked at his November 1lth briefing, "Will you rally the troops for GATT and the World Trade Organization?" he replied: "Yes. In the first place, the Administration has accepted amendments of Senator Dole and myself giving Congress dramatically more oversight of the WTO, including the right to bring up a vote on withdrawal every five years in perpetuity, so at any point that we think it is out of control or inappropriate, we can simply withdraw."

The impression given by his answer was that he and Dole recently had come up with some amendments that would allay all concerns about loss of U.S. sovereignty to, and interference in domestic U.S. concerns by, the proposed supra-national WTO. What he actually was referring to was Section 125 of the agreement, entitled "Review of Participation in the WTO," which hardly provides the security against WTO tyranny he pretends to find. One of the most manifest weaknesses of Section 125 " protection" is the five-year cycle of opportunity for withdrawing, the WTO mega-bureaucracy could do a lot of damage to American interests in five years.

Moreover, as far as "congressional oversight" goes, one need only consider how little that has been worth in protecting U.S. interests at the United Nations, the World Bank, IMF, UNESCO, or any of the other internationalist ventures with which we have become entangled.

Earlier this year Gingrich hesitated to support GATT and expressed concern that the WTO smacked of world government. "That is a bizarre turnabout for a man who almost single-handedly bailed out the Clinton Presidency by rounding up Republican votes for a similar accord - the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] - over the opposition of House Democrats," the New York Times chided in a May 8th editorial.

The Times had a point about Gingrich's NAFTA role, even though its arguments in favor of GATT/WTO were phony. "The WTO would be more pussycat than tiger - and would protect U.S. interests better than the existing GATT," putted the Times. That is about as convincing as the claims of Clinton, Gingrich and company that GATT would, after ten years, "add an average of $1,700 to the annual income of every American family."

The WTO does indeed present a threat of world government. It is a multinational body with legislative, executive and judicial branches wielding formidable powers. The myriad of ministries, councils, committees, commissions, panels and boards to be established under the WTO would make it a global leviathan. It would be far worse than the dozens of international commissions, committees, and secretariats created to oversee and regulate trade between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. under the 1,700 page NAFTA treaty - which Newt Gingrich gave to Bill Clinton on a silver platter. So much for promises about kinder, simpler, and less intrusive government.

Fast Track to Disaster

However, the dangers of the GATT/WTO agreement, itself are, at this point, of less immediate concern than the immoral and illegal process by which it is being rammed down our throats. And this from Mr. Gingrich, who in the same breath promises a new "openness" and "honesty" in governing and who calls for greater "participation" and "engagement" by the people. It is the rankest hypocrisy to talk about the new "mandate" and "listening to the people" and then to continue with the same sleazy manner of doing "business as usual" in Washington.

Forcing a "fast track" vote on GATT/WTO - what some have called the "most important vote of the decade, if not the last 50 years" - in the "lame duck" Congress is an unconscionable act that cannot be justified on any county. It intentionally ignores what is obvious:

As Gingrich himself has noted, "the people have spoken," and have elected a new Congress; and that new Congress should have the right (and responsibility) to vote on something as important as GATT. It should not be passed by a body that has been repudiated by the voters.

The GATT system and negotiations have been going on since 1947. It is absurd to suggest that after nearly 50 years we must now rush this new agreement through, that it cannot wait a couple more months for a new Congress to consider.

The GATT accord runs some 26,000 pages. No member of Congress has read all of this monstrosity. Gingrich promised to make all bills and documents accessible to the American people, but we certainly have not had full access to all of this document.

If the Clinton health care program deserved to be knocked of the "fast track" because it was a costly, bureaucratic, socialists nightmare, GATT/WTO deserves the same.

"The matters with which the GATT/WTO accord deal clearly qualify it as a treaty and therefore require ratification by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Gingrich's repeated veneration of the Constitution (not to mention his oath) will be proven false if he does not demand compliance with this constitutional requirement.

However, the new Speaker of the House appears to be taking his direction from the New York Times and from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the driving organizational force behind GATT (Gingrich is a member of the CFR), rather than from the Constitution or "the people" he claims to honor and represent.

Rhetoric and Reality

Since so many other conservatives actives have been gulled into embracing GATT under the false banner of "free trade," Newt Gingrich's role in promoting NAFTA & GATT is seen by as insufficient in and of itself to call into question his "conservative" bona fides. After all, his rhetoric is as fiercely conservative as anyone 's. He once denounced Senator Robert Dole, the Republican Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, as "the tax collector for the welfare state." He labeled all of official Washington "a large, open conspiracy to take away the money and freedom of the citizens of this country." In 1985, he called President Reagan's rapprochement with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbechev potentially "the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich." Over and over again, he had denounced big government, socialism, high taxes, deficits, welfare, bureaucracy, and the "counterculture."

True enough, but in politics deeds speak louder than words. And Newt Gingrich's deeds all too often do not match his words. Since entering Congress, Gingrich has repeatedly voted for big government, deficit spending, welfare, foreign aid, regulatory intervention, and socialism. He has repeatedly voted to send U.S. taxpayer dollars to communist countries and to grant communist tyrannies such as Red China and the Soviet Union most favored nation (MFN) trade status, while demanding trade sanctions against South Africa.

He has given support to Nelson Mandela and the terrorist African National Congress. He repeatedly has voted for extremist environmentalist measures that are costing Americans billions of dollars. He repeatedly has catered to the "counterculture" and the militant homosexual lobby. For part two click below.

Click here for part -----> 2,

2009 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country as well as her own; ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

It isn't possible to respond to 20,000 emails a month. Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site; it has been updated and filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net


 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, the new Speaker of the House appears to be taking his direction from the New York Times and from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the driving organizational force behind GATT (Gingrich is a member of the CFR), rather than from the Constitution or "the people" he claims to honor and represent.