June 26, 2006
June 27, 2006
June 28, 2006
June 29, 2006
Posted on 06/29/2006 9:53:51 AM PDT by presidio9
The Hon. Newt Gingrich's recent oracular rumble to a luncheon audience at the Brookings Institution, during which he threatened to seek the Republican presidential nomination if a "vacuum" remains in the Republican field, reminded me of an inescapable insight I suffered sometime in 1998. Gingrich is the Republicans' Bill Clinton. Being a Republican, Gingrich is not as hollow as the Arkansas huckster, nor as amusing. In fact, he can be boring.
Springing from the same late 1960s jugendkultur as the Boy President, Gingrich is the career pol, the hustling, self-promoting narcissist, the sempiternal fantasist. When he was Speaker of the House I should have called him the Boy Speaker. He made his exit from politics like a troubled adolescent: whining, blustering, and guilty as charged.
Had Gingrich measured himself scrupulously against those Republicans now mentioned as presidential contenders, he never could have spoken of a "vacuum." George Allen, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney are all sturdier candidates than the Boy Speaker whose House colleagues politely put a banana peel under his well-worn wingtips in 1998. Doubtless there are many other Republicans who would be preferable to Gingrich. How about Tom Tancredo? What is it that makes Gingrich think he is a fit candidate to lead the nation? He prides himself on being an intellectual, by which he means being a policy wonk. This is another of his fantasies; he confuses wonkiness with learnedness and wisdom. This is a fantasy he shares with Clinton.
I once heard an English gentleman, fresh from bathing in Clinton's radiance, confide to the great British historian Paul Johnson that Clinton is "so intelligent." "Not intelligent," Johnson responded, "cunning." The word encapsulates Gingrich's thought process perfectly. Yet again, Gingrich is a Republican. He is not quite as cunning as Clinton. In fact, whenever he found himself up against Clinton, he was bested by the Boy President.
When all the brag and bounce of Gingrich's intellectual pretense is anesthetized and the corpus of his intellectual work is subjected to scholarly analysis, what do we see? An eternal graduate student at a mediocre state university has been playing with bits and pieces of the large ideas of Milton Friedman and like-minded political scientists, for instance, Edward Banfield. Down the hall is Clinton. The bits and pieces that he plays with are those of Ira Magaziner or Robert B. Reich. Gingrich is a more adventuresome graduate student.
Both Gingrich and Clinton benefited from the 1990s adjournment of character as a desideratum for public life. Very cleverly, candidate Clinton in the 1992 campaign managed to banish character as a campaign issue. He portrayed the topic as a Republican dirty trick, and the journalists swallowed it. Eight years later it became clear why Clinton was desperate to render the question of character a topic unfit for public discussion. By then Gingrich too needed this dispensation. Of course, Republicans are more fastidious than Democrats when it comes to personal morals, and so when Gingrich's cutie was discovered even as he was impeaching Clinton for lying about a cutie and obstruction, Republicans gave Gingrich the heave-ho.
Now Gingrich is back, and he expects Republican women to forget his treatment of women. He expects Republicans to forget how he bungled the 1998 off-year elections, claiming at one point that Republicans were actually going to pick up seats when -- truth be known -- they were lucky to preserve their margin. One of the reasons for the Republicans' losses that year was that the Boy Speaker rushed an omnibus spending bill laden with pork through the House, to the dismay of Republican voters. The other was his sophomoric handling of one of the most important constitutional crisis of the 20th century, Clinton's impeachment. One day he would summon Republicans to attack. The next day he would claim to be aghast at their combativeness. Again Clinton bested him.
Now he believes that he is a plausible candidate for the presidency. Given his erratic record, do I need to adduce any more evidence that he is a fantasist? He fashioned the Republican takeover of the House in 1994 with the indispensable assistance of his cogenerationists from the gaseous 1960s, the Clintons. In 1998 he recklessly imperiled his party's dominance and disgraced his name. Since his fall he has, as has his Democratic look-alike, strutted and pontificated tirelessly. Both had their moment in history, and both blew it.
ET on CNN?
Quite a smackdown. I agree that Newt is a narcissist. That's why he goes on and on. He's way too dangerous to be president. I am convinced he'd try to DO way too much. He is too grandiose. And let's face it, he couldn't even hack the Speaker's gig.
ET, I started to post this from CNN, who had picked it up, and then I decided to just go to the source (Creator's Syndicate). I forgot to change the location name before posting.
It's not CNN.
Don't hold back, Emmett, tell us what you really think :-)
--It's not CNN.
For a moment there my hopes skyrocketed.
Essentially, he is correct in his summation of Gingrich as self-promoting and self-aggrandizing, but the politician who is not is so rare as to be almost fictional-- ego is usually what gets them and keeps them there.
But Gingrich, at least, relies on the power of ideas to drive interest in him as a candidate. Clinton simply regurgitated what the polls told him to. I'd say a candidate with ideas beats the same candidate with only the ability to triangulate.
Never cared for Neutered Newt.
See post nine. The article did indeed appear on CNN.com.
June 26, 2006
June 27, 2006
June 28, 2006
June 29, 2006
His books are quite good, however. I found them to be surprisingly good.
But, after all, I will be president before Mr. Gingrich. And I'm not going to run.
Good post.
Contrary to what we are supposed to believe about this "anti-clinton" politician, Newt shut down many investigations of the clinton crime machine. One wonders what they had on him in those FBI files.
>> Springing from the same late 1960s jugendkultur as the Boy President, <<
Grand Prize Nominee, for senseless use of a big, foreign word to make oneself look smart:
Emmet Tyrell, for using "Jugenkultur" instead of "Youth Culture."
That's the theme music playing now! Sing along!
The infinitessimal arachnid ascended the aqueus suspensor
Precipitation descended, disestablishing the arachnid's spatial positioning
The Solar body emerged, dessicating the environmental millieu,
and the infintessimal arachnic reasserted his incumbent liebensraum.
IF Newt gets the party nod I will vote for him no matter who the RATS nominate.
Well if it ends up between hiltery and newt.. I think I would cast my vote for newt.
I would much prefer Tom Delay than Newt!
clintoons "neutered" Newt long ago. He's so ineffective as a leader.
June 29, 2006 prediction. Newt Gingrich will be the VP candidate on the winning GOP ticket in 2008.
RET and Ann Coulter should have about a dozen children together so their genes propagate well into future centuries.
Look for Tom Delay to seek higher office (US Senate, TX governor) once he's cleared from the Ronnie Earle show trial. I wouldn't be surprised if he runs for the top job in 2012.
This article is an insult to Slick Willie as he IS the master of making political foes vanish into thin air...
Sure I'm nitpicking here, but that was no "cutie" blowing Bubba's whistle. That was a heifer!
I noticed that too! Even had to look it up...at least the "jugend" part.
In your dreams!!!!!
LOL! I love Pearls Before Swine.
LOL! ET has a grandiose style, that's for sure.
Sure you know Mencken* is one of his heroes.
Upon re-perusal of his work, with the utmost delecation and self abasement I find myself sufficiently cognizant of the d-uhhh....
what he say?
*"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
the sempiternal fantasist
Reference > American Heritage® > Dictionary
semolina semplice CONTENTS · INDEX · ILLUSTRATIONS · BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. sempiternal
SYLLABICATION: sem·pi·ter·nal PRONUNCIATION: s
m
p
-tûr
n
l
ADJECTIVE: Enduring forever; eternal. See synonyms at infinite. ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, from Old French sempiternel, from Late Latin sempitern lis, from Latin sempiternus : semper, always; see sem-1 in Appendix I + aeternus, eternal; see aiw- in Appendix I.
OTHER FORMS: sem ) —NOUN
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by the Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
You may not like him because you can't understand him.
That's why he goes on and on.
He does that because some people are too stooopid to absorb intellectual thought.
"Quite a smackdown. I agree that Newt is a narcissist. That's why he goes on and on. He's way too dangerous to be president. I am convinced he'd try to DO way too much. He is too grandiose. And let's face it, he couldn't even hack the Speaker's gig."
I like him so much, I hate to agree with you but you are correct.
I guess he is an example of a great historical figure that pulled off one America's biggest political coups by getting us the congress, unfortunately like some great generals his talents don't transfer to all jobs.
I still hope he plays a role as a political voice and adviser.
Great post, dangus! Methinks ET's been bunking with Buckley. He didn't write like that back in the days when he was Boy Pundit---and much wittier than he is lately.
I think I understand him better than you do.
He's an interesting guy.
Do you know Newt's educational background? Ever heard of Contract With America?
Some cannot bring themselves to respect and admire intellectual thinkers who are willing to put forth tough ideas and challenges. The business collegues I respect most are tough, smart, and because of those traits, are somewhat egotistical.
Funny you should say that.
I view Newt's educational background as a strike against him. Hell, RR just had a bachelor's degree from a modest university. The Contract with America was fine, but remind us again...what happened to Newt as speaker? Something about resigning in disgrace? Ring a bell? He got played.
Obviously, you like him. That's fine. But if the best you can do to support your view is lame attempts to insult me, you should just save us both the time and move on. What's the point? What do you hope to accomplish calling me "stoopid" and asking lame questions? Life's too short. Either say something interesting, or shove off.
Hillary doesn't have a chance in Hell. Well, maybe in Hell she has a chance, but not here in the USA.
I seriously doubt Newt would accept the VP nomination.
I think a lot of people, myself included, can respect thinkers while at the same time regarding them as not presidential material. Newt's in that category. He's an interesting guy. He could have his own TV show on Fox. But he's not cut out to be president.
The business collegues I respect most are tough, smart, and because of those traits, are somewhat egotistical.
Interesting that even while praising him, his ego comes into the discussion. I would say RR was tough and smart, but not egotistical. I would say GWB is tough, not as smart, but also not egotistical. Newt is definitely egotistical. He really is as egotistical as Rush Limbaugh pretends to be. He's very grandiose, and he fancies himself to be the gubmint's version of Jack Welch. You probably have bought into it. I haven't.
Why do you say that?
I like yer car tho.
Because I don't think he wants to be second banana. It'd be humiliating, especially if he's second banana to a mediocrity like George Allen. Newt sees himself as numero uno.
That's the only word you have a problem with? You didn't read close enough. He always writes like this. It's OK, I think he's funny.
As for Newt's being "wordy," a basic tenet in professional public speaking in a business spere, you:
1) Tell 'em what you are going to tell 'em
2) Tell 'em
3) Tell 'em again
For the last 30 years, I've conducted hundreds of business seminars all over the country and parts of Europe and South America. For some reason, I was well paid by my clients. Calvin Klein, IBM, Glaxo Smith Kline, Bayer AG, Seagrams, American Red Cross, American Cyanamid...
Let's assume that Newt has the ego that you and others ascribe to him, and that he wants to be President more than anything. Fine, if he doesn't win the primary but is asked to be on the ticket, would that not serve his "selfish" needs? Would that not be good exposure for him to run again in 4 years if the ticket loses? Should the ticket win, the VP job is not a bad launching spot for the Presidency. Only a heartbeat away should something happen to the POTUS, and would be the logical choice for Presidential nominee the next time one was needed, in 4 or 8 years. What am I missing here?
It probably didn't need to go as far as the FBI files. In 1995 Vanity Fair magazine ran a blurb where they mentioned Newt was having an affair and may have mentioned his paramour, Callista Bisek. Shortly after his downfall in 1998 the NY Post ran an article by an individual who was either a Republican staffer or Congressman (the article didn't say which) that was posted here on FR. The author wrote that, in 1995, he'd spoken to one or more DemonRat staffers who said they really didn't need to fear Newt because of all the dirt they had on him. The Bisek affair is what finally sank him.
The striking thing about Newt during al of 1995 and 1996 was that he never allowed any counter attack ads to be run against the horrible barrage of false and misleading garbage that came from the Clintons, even though the RNC was financially "drinking from a fire hose," as Haley Barbour, the RNC chairman, said. The only concluding that can reasonably reached from all of this is Newt was horribly compromised by facts known to the Clintons and they effectively blackmailed him into betraying the Republican Revolution.
We should not make him our nominee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
