Posted on 03/13/2007 9:11:43 PM PDT by jazusamo
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
The enthusiastic reception given to a speech by Newt Gingrich at a recent meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee has revived speculation that he may enter the presidential nomination race, after all.
It seems hard to believe that Gingrich has been out of politics for more than a dozen years. He has certainly not been out of the media that long -- and it is doubtful if he has overlooked the political value of maintaining his name recognition.
At one time it was thought that Newt Gingrich was permanently washed up after leaving the House of Representatives under a cloud of "scandal." But "scandal" is one of those words that the media use in a very inconsistent manner.
Bill Clinton's tawdry affair with Monica Lewinsky was usually referred to in the liberal media as "the Lewinsky matter" -- not the Lewinsky "scandal."
The word "scandal" seems to be reserved for people the media don't like, and House Speaker Newt Gingrich was high up on the list of people that liberals didn't like. He was second only to Ronald Reagan as the most effective conservative leader of his generation.
Gingrich engineered the Republicans' stunning takeover of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Moreover, he followed through by carrying out the conservative agenda on which the Republicans were elected.
That was a big difference from the more recently elected -- and then repudiated -- Republican Congress.
What about Newt Gingrich's "scandals"?
The biggest scandal, according to the media, was that he "shut down the government" by cutting the budget, so that there was not enough money to operate.
In reality, the budget passed by the House of Representatives when Newt Gingrich was Speaker provided more money than any previous budget in the history of the nation. But liberals define a "cut" as any appropriation that is less than what was asked for, regardless of whether it is more than anyone ever appropriated before.
President Clinton asked for more money than Speaker Gingrich was willing to give him, so Clinton shut down the government and said that the Republicans had shut down the government.
He knew he could depend on the liberal media to buy his spin and repeat it endlessly on the evening news broadcasts and Sunday talk shows.
The Republicans did themselves no good by their inept statements trying to defend what they had done. To counter ringing rhetoric by the Democrats that these "cuts" would hurt the starving and the downtrodden, Republicans made wooden speeches about statistics, comparing "OMB figures" with "CBO figures."
Not surprisingly, Clinton and the Democrats won that confrontation going away, and Gingrich was tarred as a heartless man, denying food and shelter to the needy. The real scandal in all this was that the Republicans couldn't get the marbles out of their mouths to let the public know the truth -- and they should have known that the media were not about to puncture the Democrats' hot air balloon.
The second Newt Gingrich "scandal" was his violation of one of the many red tape requirements put into the law to supposedly clean up politics. Politics has not been noticeably cleaner since these laws were passed but someone is always tripping over the technicalities, so as to supply the media with "scandals" -- if those who trip are not liberals, in which case it is just a "matter."
Finally, Newt Gingrich admitted to having an extra-marital affair. This was equated with Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky "matter," even though Gingrich told the truth in public while Clinton lied under oath in a court where he was being sued.
Many a man has found some woman irresistible when he shouldn't have -- and, in a field of candidates crowded with saints, this would be enough to permanently disqualify Newt Gingrich.
But this does not seem to be the situation we are faced with. Conservatives waiting for the candidate of their dreams can give us President Hillary Clinton in the meantime. Among these alternatives, Newt Gingrich doesn't look bad at all.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
You didn't say that they had similar records. I don't know enough to dispute that, and I won't.
You said they were similar, and I reasonably thought you meant that they were similar men, and they plainly are not.
I don't know that Fred Thompson ever made any promise to John McCain that he would not run. You have some McCain spokesman saying something to that effect, but no quote from Thompson himself. It could just be staffers Be-essing each other. "We've been assured" - by who?
And then you have the staffer saying that McCain thinks the world of Thompson. That sounds more like pressure to me, nothing more. I.E., McCain people trying to spook Thompson.
Thompson is serious, and when he gets in for real, in maybe two months, McCain will be as dead as a door nail. In fact, McCain already is, but the body needs to cool down some before most people will be convinced.
Today marks the first time I've ever disagreed with Tom Sowell --
IMO, Newt still looks very bad.
Let's face it:
Even though Newt is clearly the most brilliant political strategist of our age, and even though he can mouth "conservative niceties" better than anybody since Ronald Reagan, he is totally unelectable. If the GOP should be so foolish as to nominate NG for Prez, we'd see the greatest dhimmiqrat electoral sweep since 1974.
Do you wanna have a big tax increase? What about another assault weapons ban? Or how would you like to have a left-wing Supreme Court for the next 25 years? And should the USA pull out of Iraq and forget about fighting Islamic terrorism?
If you want any of these disasters to come about, then it's simple: All you'll need is to make Newt the GOP nominee for POTUS.
"The real scandal in all this was that the Republicans couldn't get the marbles out of their mouths to let the public know the truth..."
And it's true to this very day, where Clinton is credited with "welfare reform," "cutting the budget", and the "tax surplus."
All of these things were accomplished by the Republican Congress,
"What about Clinton firing all 93 right after he took office?"
Some Rat Congresswoman on C-SPAN this morning repeatedly used the talking point that evades the 93 firings by Clinton.
It's basically "This is the largest mid-term firing in the history of American government" (conveniently forgetting Clinton's early-term firings).
Didn't Newt resign in 1998? This is 2007. That's not a dozen years. Bad writing there on Sowell's part.
One thing he'll do is to redefine the entire process of campaigning.
At his Cooper Union speech, Newt spent ths first 5 minutes railing against the current sound-bite campaigns which he thinks are a disaster and largely dictated by political consultants and the press.
Newt's substitute is to have 90 minute, one-on-one debates amongst all candidates, for some period before the elections/primaries.
He said Giuliani has already signed-on to the idea, and the president of Cooper Union enthusiastically offered the facility for any debates.
No all we need is for C-SPAN to broadcast them.
Gingrich could make a good Vice President. Or Sec. of State. Maybe Press Secretary?
Just don't let em obfuscate. Clinton fired 93 right after he took office. Bush fired eleven after they were evaluated and found wanting.
No.
I disagree.
Politically, Thompson is more conservative and more consistent - what they have in common is support for CFR (a negative for Fred) and a "maverick" tendency (a positive for Fred, a negative for McCain since he's become a media whore) and I think if Thompson sees that McCain's numbers aren't recovering, he'll jump in and end up endorsed BY McCain in the end.
We do not need this hypocrite either.
We do not need this hypocrite either.
One of his prime clarifications was between statements which were prescriptive, and those which were descriptive.
There is the ought to be, and there is the is, in my own, present vulgarization.
There ought to be a Reagan on a white horse--yet there is an Alien-like beast (Mrs. Bill Clinton) which must be stopped.
Could we just run Sowell? If the Pubbies need a female, how about a black female, and a single Mom as well?
Anyone think Janice Rogers Brown would play well in Peoria?
Hint: Read her decisions before deciding.
"...the MSM will never forgive him..."
Perhaps a lapse in phrasing, as though the Godless has the moral station or desire to forgive anyone for anything.
But this does not seem to be the situation we are faced with. Conservatives waiting for the candidate of their dreams can give us President Hillary Clinton in the meantime. Among these alternatives, Newt Gingrich doesn't look bad at all.
All very well to find Newt wanting on the marital faithfulness front, and move on - but, to whom/what? It has been a very long time since the Democrats have elected a "saint" not named Jimmy Carter.How do we process the fact that the most recent notable "saint" left it to Ronald Reagan to get the country going again, whip inflation, handle the Energy Crisis, and Transcend Communism. And in the process, btw, fight a major naval campaign against a country which had been an important US ally when the "saint" took office in 1977 . . .
We have a serious problem on our hands. If Romney were reliably conservative that would be one thing. But as Sowell notes, Newt is unquestionably Mr. Republican at this point. And I think we have to face the fact that as far as Big Journalism is concerned, being Mr. Republican draws a great big bullseye on your chest no matter who you are. "Mr. Republican" is always going to come with "baggage" of some sort, I'm afraid. It's not as if we could get Thomas Sowell nominated - or that if we did, Big Journalism wouldn't manufacture "baggage" on him like they did to Clarence Thomas.
Always did admire Mr. Sowell. This just makes it ever stronger admiration.
I like that thoughtful thought!!
"There is the 'ought to be', and there is 'the is'"
*It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
*Put some ice on it.
Please, help add to my list of profound quotes from our President of Presidents, and future global minister of social justice, (and potential first gent), William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
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.