A hoary bromide tells us that “A drowning man will grasp at straws.” What if you, a
Chinese dissident, were treading water in the middle of the ocean, desperately
trying to keep your head above water with a monstrous storm looming on the horizon, and Mao Tse-Tung pulled up alongside in a powerboat and offered a helping hand—would you accept it?
Or what if you, a Russian dissident, were in the same situation and Joseph Stalin suddenly appeared and offered to help—would you reject him? Or what if you, a person of a certain faith and nationality, were sinking for the third time and Adolph Hitler extended a helping hand—would you start paddling in a different direction?
And finally, what if you, an American citizen, a beautiful young female nurse, were thrown a lifeline by Richard Speck, the mass murderer who tortured, raped and butchered eight student nurses from South Chicago Community Hospital—would you ignore it?
I can only speak for myself should I be in such a predicament, but I know that I would first consider the odds of my survival should I reject such an offer. I would spend perhaps two nano-seconds in consideration and then
accept the help and embrace the helper.
Our country is now in that situation. We are desperately paddling to avoid becoming and continuing to be a second-rate nation, drowning in unsustainable debt and no helping hand in sight. No, belay that—there is one offer on the table, an offer being made by a person that has the potential to save us from that watery grave. He is e pluribus unum, one among many who are making the same offer, but he is the only one who has the qualifications to get the job done. However—and this is a big however—he is struggling to be allowed to rescue our nation from descending into mediocrity.
From Dictionary.Com: Mediocrity is a situation which can occur in a democracy in which mediocre people prevail. The society is then subordinated to a quasi-egalitarian ideology in which words and ideas are redefined by mediocre people, to be convenient for mediocre people.
That person—let’s call him our potential savior—is being pilloried by various sections of our society for his past transactions, transitions and transgressions. He is from the “old school,” a Washington insider, a former Speaker of the House of Representatives who was elected ten times and spent twenty-one years in Congress before resigning his seat. Many attribute his “fall from grace” to his push for impeachment and removal from office of then-president Bill Clinton as the result of the president’s extramarital affair with a White House intern.
Even given all those negatives, Newt Gingrich is the only one of the ten
Republicans that is qualified to be the president of the United States and
the commander-in-chief of our armed forces. He is not a mediocre person.
He has the will and the knowledge to bring our country together if we only
give him the opportunity to utilize that knowledge.
I fear that history will judge us harshly if we do not give him the votes to allow him to take the necessary steps to strengthen our economy and restore our country to its greatness and its royal position among the other nations of the world. For many years we considered ourselves to be citizens of the greatest nation on earth, and most of the other nations agreed with us. Sadly, that agreement has been badly weakened.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
The King of Texas 
matthewbwalden
December 6, 2011 at 8:29 pm
Your article has intrigued me. Although i disagree, as my opinion is that in this upcoming election there is no good candidate. Romney is in wall streets pockets, Gingrich disgraced his entire party after using his power to launder around a half of a million dollars, and is still doing the same practices for money. Paul, although having good ideals, is a religious fanatic. Huntsman doesn’t know anything about foreign affairs. Bachman is les educated than myself at age 19, and thank god Cain dropped out as he doesn’t know anything about government in general. However, as much as i’ve attacked the republicans, i hate obama equally. Obama preached to me, and the nation about this wonderful change he was going to bring and just like Brutus in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar he stabbed us in the back.
I am curious though as to why you think Newt is the man, especially since analysts are saying obama would crush him in the general?
thekingoftexas
December 10, 2011 at 8:05 am
Thanks for visiting and thanks for the comment. By my count I found at least eleven expressions of your opinions, and it may surprise you to know that I agree completely with ten of them, or ninety-one percent of the total eleven. I cannot agree with your comment on Bachman, namely that in your opinion Bachman is les educated than myself at age 19 . . . I haven’t read any of Bachman’s writings, but she appears to be well-versed in the English language. Since she speaks correctly, I would expect her to write correctly including proper capitalization, proper comma and apostrophe placement, no incomplete sentences, etc., etc. If you are better educated than Bachman then she must have earned her law degree at one of the many online institutions of higher learning.
You asked why I think Newt is the man. I can only offer a variation, corruption if you will, of Winston Churchill’s analysis of democracy, namely that Newt is the worst candidate for the presidency, except for the fact that all the other candidates are so much worse.
Thanks again for visiting and for the comment. I welcome your input on my writing efforts, both future and past postings.
sue
December 8, 2011 at 10:51 am
You continue to amaze me with your language and oratorical skills. Being highly unpolitical, I can have no comment on the validity of Newt. sue gibson (by the way I am at a standstill with my book)
thekingoftexas
December 10, 2011 at 7:13 am
Hi, Sue – thanks for visiting and thanks for the comment. I respect your unpoliticalness (I may have created a new word – I couldn’t find it in the online dictionary), and I appreciate your comment on my writing. I will endeavor to live up to that in future postings. As for Newt, I can only offer a variation, corruption if you will, of Winston Churchill’s analysis of democracy, namely that Gringwich is the worst candidate for the presidency, except for the fact that all the other candidates are so much worse.
matthewbwalden
December 10, 2011 at 7:08 pm
To the politicians favorite terms for when they are proven to be completely false: “My statement wasn’t intended to be factual.” Haha (excuse the use of onomatopoeia as a complete sentence.) I am well aware that Bachmann is more educated than I, however I don’t believe her to be the most intelligent of individuals. I truly do love her ambition, as she is pushing for what she believes in, sadly alot of what she believes in is highly unintelligent. I do agree with some of her campaign goals, however what i agree with are basic things that almost anyone can agree on. The basic ideas such as reducing our debt, minimalizing the beauracracy where it is unnecessary (although most of the departments are unnecessary), reducing unnecessary spenidng, etc. I, just as anyone else should, have a huge problem with the government spending my money on waste. I can concur with your Churchhill quote in general that I’ve yet to see a president, or a candidate that really fits into my idea of a perfect candidate. However, i really wish Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT)would run, as he is probably the closest anyone has come.
thekingoftexas
December 12, 2011 at 8:28 pm
I appreciate your statement that your prior analysis of Bachmann’s intelligence was not intended to be factual. As for Senator Bernie Sanders, I can neither agree nor disagree with your wish that he would run for the presidency. However, I respect your belief that he would be a perfect candidate.
Thanks for visiting and thanks for the comment.
Tyler Pulesandero
January 1, 2012 at 4:31 am
I think to wake up will require something like repentance and conversion, to put it in religious terms.
thekingoftexas
January 2, 2012 at 9:25 am
You may well be right, but I consider this to be a battle between acceptance and rejection, and I fear that acceptance of the present downhill slide of our country will prevail, to put it in political terms. Thanks for visiting and thanks for your cogent comment. Incidentally, I checked out your sakem.info but I couldn’t read it. It’s all Greek to me.
Isaac Mason u
January 13, 2012 at 2:31 pm
Janus like, the scholar is looking back to the past as well as forward to the future for more effective means for the organization of his materials.
thekingoftexas
January 16, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Word Press deemed your comment to be spam, but since your site is in a language with which I am not familiar I can’t classify it as spam. However, the clause Janus like had me from the start. Few, perhaps none, of those in my circle know of Janus and his ability to look into the future as well as into the past, hence the two-faced coin. If your comment was spam it was wasted because I don’t know what you are selling or saying. At any rate I accept the comment as a compliment and I thank you for the visit—you’re welcome any time.