Newt’s an enigma to me. I would consider this piece to be the most excellent complete analysis of the current state of the Republican Party and what needs to be done about it that I’ve read. But then he also does extremely dumb stuff like sitting on the couch with Pelosi, criticizing Bain from the left, etc. ???
Oh stop with the couch already! How many couches did romney sit on w/liberals that you never saw a picture of? You saw what they wanted you to see and it worked! What about ALL the lies from romney against Newt - you can’t handle truth about Bain?
"If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his friend" - Abraham Lincoln
"Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" - Abraham Lincoln
To many young people (and many not so young), the "man-made global warming / climate change" is by now a matter of faith, even, as they might believe, scientifically-based "faith" - you will not get through to them about science or fraud or possible positive aspects of AGW (read recent article WSJ: Matt Ridley: Cooling Down the Fears of Climate Change, 2012 December 18).
You will not even get to the first base with them, if you are considered a "climate change denier" - they simply will not listen to you or your arguments - you will be challenging their faith.
If you don't challenge their faith, it's very easy to provide the argument that the right "green solutions" (like "clean, cheap, green" nuclear energy, natural gas, filtrated oil and antracite, and even localized - not expensive farm-based - solar energy) will make their energy more plentiful, cheaper and will not require taxes, fees, more regulation and (most importantly for them) "sacrifices" that Democratic doomsday versions of "global warming"/"climate change" are requiring them to accept.
You don't need to change their faith in "climate change" to convert them from liberal drones demanding drastic actions (meaning more taxes, fees, subsidies for "green" technologies like expensive and inefficient wind turbines and solar farms, which are nothing more than crony socialism) into allies who will be on your side of the "green revolution" and leave Democrats in the dust on the issue, because their only interest in the hoax is government-doled money.
But to be able to talk to them about this, you have to shed the image of Republican "environmental denier" first, or you won;t ever get through the wall. You don't have to agree with them on the issue of AGW - in fact, that issue itself becomes irrelevant, a side issue - the solution and the price to pay are the only issues that are relevant and there you have much better hand than Democrats who only care to exploit the issue to take more money from them. Whether they will come to see the GW facts later or not is less important than getting them to do the "right thing" due to their own self-interest.
This completely undermines the Democrats "environmentalist" raison d'être. Winning the war without firing a shot, turning "enemies" into allies can be done with a little strategic thinking. Doesn't work when the radio hosts only look for "beating them with facts" - where did it get them, us? To quote Charlie Sheen, are we "winning"? If a tree falls in a forest and nobody hears it... what good is the fact that it fell?
Problem is that most people often only read the headlines and opinions about Newt (i.e., "Newt translated") instead of reading/listening/watching the entirety of what he himself actually wrote/said... and doing a little thinking themselves.
It confines itself totally to technical and structural political questions. There is no mention of ideology.
One of the reasons for the Democrat party's success is that they all share the same ideology and are single-mindedly pursuing political victory so as to implement their agenda.
Beyond winning elections, the Republican party has no ideology, no agenda. There is no shared goal. No vision of the future.
More than anything, this absence of ideology has made the Republican establishment more vacuous with every passing election. What is their objective beyond a.) gaining the committee chairmanships and being in charge of spending the money and b.) winning the next election?
Hint: It sure as hell has nothing to do with shrinking government.
I have to agree with your post.
Newt is likely the best political historian and theorist alive today, but on the other hand he has a tinear on things like the Peelousi Couch and to his “public image”.
Although I do think Newt wants his letter to RNC to assist solving the problem and take control of our Country and destiny away from the liberal progressives, he does not wish to hand the reins over to non-politicians or to too much grass-roots. Newt’s likely purpose for all his public actions in the coming few years is to become the leader of a more conservative RNC, if not the President.
But then he also does extremely dumb stuff like sitting on the couch with Pelosi, criticizing Bain from the left, etc. ???
***
And don’t forget one of his recent gems. He says we need to accept homosexual “marriage”:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2970873/posts
When Newt did that, he was trying to win a (primary) election, and his perception of how that issue would sit with the voters was exactly correct.
I identified, right here, in December 2011-March 2012 why nominating Romney was crazy, and Bain was one of my principal issues.
Newt understood this better than any other candidate available in the winter of 2011-12, and he should get some credibility for it.