Gingrich Criticizes ‘Bad Deal’; Warns of 2004 Troubles

Washington, D.C. -- Newt Gingrich is making news again, sharply criticizing President Bush's top diplomat in an exclusive interview with WORLD magazine.

Last month the former Speaker of the House warned that the idea of Secretary of State Colin Powell going to Syria to meet "with a terrorist-supporting, secret police-wielding dictator" was "ludicrous."

Powell struck back. "He's accusing the president of a ludicrous act," Powell told a TV interviewer. "Mr. Gingrich was taking a broad swipe and a shot at the policies of the president of the United States. He was allegedly doing it because he has some dissatisfaction with the way the State Department runs. But he missed the State Department and hit the president."

Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage then told USA Today that, "It's clear that Mr. Gingrich is off his meds (medications) and out of therapy."

Now Gingrich tells WORLD that Powell struck a "bad deal" in Damascus, says Powell has "no interest" in reforming the State Department bureaucracy, and warned that putting too much pressure on Israel to make a peace deal with Yasser Arafat could be a "suicide pact."

Gingrich also spoke out on domestic politics, warning that "the economy not growing is the biggest threat" to President Bush's reelection and urging the GOP to focus on health care reform.

WORLD: Mr. Speaker, you sparked a lot of controversy by opposing Secretary Powell's trip to Syria. Now that he's met with Syrian President Bashar Assad, would you say the trip was successful?

GINGRICH: No trip to Damascus by any American Secretary of State has had any serious effect on the dictatorship of the Assad family in the last thirty years.…The terrorist groups in Damascus reported the day after Secretary Powell's visit that they were not closing their offices despite the reassurances he had been given by the dictator.

This follows precisely the pattern of dishonesty and blatant lying we have seen from Syrian dictators for thirty years. Assad got a photo opportunity with a famous American and America got lied to. That strikes me as a bad deal.

WORLD: Have you spoken with Secretary Powell or the White House since making your remarks?

GINGRICH: I have talked with people from the White House regularly. I get messages from people inside the State Department who agree with my criticism of the current State bureaucracy. No one from the Secretary's office has called me and given the personal nature of some of their comments (attack the messenger if you can't defeat the message is an old rule of Washington politics).

I suspect they have no interest in pursuing ideas or discussing reform. Over the last two years I've met with the Secretary and his deputy and found no interest in serious reform.

GINGRICH: First, to win the second campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq to grow societies with safety, health, prosperity and freedom for the Afghan and Iraqi people.

Second, the U.S. must help grow a Palestinian political movement and government willing to defeat the terrorists....As long as the Palestinians who want peace do not defeat the forces of terrorism, the Israelis will feel compelled to fight the terrorists and it will be impossible to achieve peace. The focus should not be on diplomacy.

The focus should be on growing and strengthening the forces of peace in Palestinian society and driving out the terrorists (of whom Arafat is one).

Third, the United States has a continuing challenge with dictatorships seeking weapons of mass destruction (Iran, Syria, Libya in the Middle East) and with terrorist organizations.

WORLD: Do you support an independent Palestinian state, and how would you assess the prospects of reaching a peace agreement in the next 12 months or so?

GINGRICH: A Palestinian state should arise as soon as Palestinians defeat the terrorists and prove they could be neighbors Israel could live in peace with. Negotiations over a Palestinian state while there are still terrorists [that are] tolerated by the Palestinian Authority is a suicide pact for Israel.

GINGRICH: The economy not growing is the biggest threat. Republicans become complacent is the second biggest threat.

GINGRICH: If the economy recovers, President Bush will win handily. If the economy stays in the doldrums the President will face a tough campaign but will probably still win. In the age of 24-hour television news things can change very fast. The Democrats will have a lively primary campaign and it is impossible to predict whom they will nominate or how effective their nominee will be.

WORLD: Ten years after the Clinton administration rolled out its "Hillary Care" approach to nationalizing health care, you've written a new book on a free market approach to health care reform. Why?

GINGRICH: Republicans should focus on growing the economy [and] creating a better system of health care….Health care is the most important challenge Americans face in their daily lives.

It is the largest segment of the economy (over 13% and growing)….We need to have an individually centered system where you have knowledge about your own health, you own your own electronic medical record, you have an insurance plan which has a tax free build up of interest on a health reimbursement account that gives you more decision making power about your own health and the system should focus on wellness and prevention so you don't become a patient unless it is absolutely unavoidable....

The title of our book is Saving Lives and Saving Money [because] we believe that applying best practices can actually lead to better health at lower cost. We are [also] establishing a Center for Health Transformation on the Internet that will help people, companies and governments learn more about better outcomes at lower cost….Readers who want to know more about it could go to www.newt.org and see what we are doing.

GINGRICH: The American pharmaceutical industry saves thousands of lives everyday by its contributions to better health. With each new discovery its products become more important. People attack the pharmaceutical industry for higher prices when those are actually a result of a badly designed market.

If people had access to an Internet-based system for drugs like Travelocity and Expedia are [available] for airlines reservations then people could make knowledgable choices about prices and effectiveness and there would be the same downward pressure on drug prices that there are on airline prices.

The pharmaceutical companies are paying the price for a market that has been designed wrong but we should focus on fixing the market not on attacking the drug companies.

Gingrich needs to shuddup. His constructive criticisim of lately is like he is a representative that knows foreign policy better than anyone. Arrogance...comes to mind as a good word.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Democrat Attacks Helping Bush

Edward I. Koch
Tuesday May 13, 2003

The leaders of the Democratic Party are making a big mistake. Their personal attacks against President George W. Bush are actually helping Bush and hurting the Democrats.

Bush’s opponents don’t seem to realize that the President’s manner and appearance are in the tradition of three American icons and make him impervious to Democratic slings and arrows.

President Reagan, John Wayne and Gary Cooper also had a quick and charming smile, an attractive way of answering a question directly and sincerely, and an “aw shucks” self-depreciating demeanor.

Like President Bush, they conveyed a warmth and vulnerability that made millions of Americans connect with them in a dog-eat-dog world where most Americans feel vulnerable themselves.

It’s true that the three to whom I compare President Bush were all Hollywood actors. Nevertheless, each was seen by the American public as a real person, not as a Hollywood cartoon figure. Some might suggest that in their screen roles, they were not acting, but they were simply playing themselves. In any case, they were universally seen as good guys. The same can be said of President Bush.

Indeed, no one among the President’s critics suggests that he is not what he seems to be.

President Bush has overwhelmingly won the political battles he has fought to date. His leadership skills have been demonstrated time and again - internationally in successful wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; and domestically in pursuing his economic strategy of tax reductions on a scale never seen before, notwithstanding the political opposition.

While no one in elective office can ever be described as invulnerable in some future election, President Bush is perceived by most as a near shoo-in for reelection. But his adversaries keep their spirits high and whistle past the graveyard by thinking back to President George H.W. Bush’s political demise in 1992.

He too had demonstrated superb political leadership in international affairs with his victory in 1991 in Kuwait.

But his failure to effectively deal with the economy consigned him to defeat. This could happen to the current President Bush, but I don’t believe it will.

To be sure, “It’s the economy, stupid,” the refrain from Bill Clinton’s first election victory, cannot be ignored. But President Bush and his advisors are not stupid.

The President is lucky (and luck is for the able) that we appear to be leaving bear country and slowly entering the grasslands, the wide open spaces that bulls need to grow fat. We would already be there had Harvey Pitt, appointed by Bush as SEC Chairman and then replaced, done what so many expected of him: beard the Wall Street operators in their dens.

If only he had said, “I am here - figuratively speaking - to convict those who took their fellow citizens, the little guys, mostly in the middle class, to the cleaners.” Better yet, if he had added, “I want to - figuratively - hang a Wall Street broker, investment banker or analyst from a lamppost every day, but only when it is established by a court that they fleeced those little guys who relied on their dishonest statements and reports on stocks.”

Had he, the stock market would have gone up, as investors returned with their confidence restored. Regrettably, Pitt’s successor has not learned from these mistakes.

A word of advice to the President from someone like myself who feels he was fleeced along with the others:

Denounce the settlement entered into by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, a leading Democrat, and SEC Chairman William H. Donaldson, recently appointed by you, who have given analysts, brokers and the Wall Street investment bankers amnesty from criminal prosecution in exchange for a cash payment of $1.4 billion, paltry when compared to the $7 trillion in market losses they helped create.

Denounce that disgraceful settlement, President Bush, in words that will ring in history as President Reagan’s still do on international matters. Remember those unforgettable words, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” referring to the Berlin Wall erected by the communist “evil empire.”

Mr. President, you spoke truth in international affairs with your “axis of evil” reference. Now, go the whole nine yards and find your own phrase for the Wall Street tycoons who have impoverished the nation and demand their prosecution.

Ask Attorney General John Ashcroft to examine the possibility of withdrawing from the settlement, it not yet having gone into effect. Ashcroft would become the poster boy of the nation if he used some of his prosecutorial zeal for those who have endangered the twilight years of the pensioners in this country and those baby boomers who expected to join their ranks. You know how to do it. You demonstrated that when you landed on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln looking like Tom Cruise in “Top Gun.”

You had every right to that extraordinary exposure. Were we living in the days of ancient Rome, you would be entitled to a triumphal march through the streets of Washington, D.C., and New York City through new arches built in your honor with the Iraqi leadership captured to date pulling your chariot.

We have progressed since those times, and the landing on the Abraham Lincoln was an acceptable substitute and, frankly, much cheaper. Nevertheless, your foolish opponents decry the expense. They would have preferred your taking a taxi to the beach and a water taxi to the ship.

Mr. President, you did the right thing. When you got it, flaunt it.

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.

Insignificant

WARNING