Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Newt may not be Tea Party, but his D.C. enemies treat him like he is

    Newt may not be Tea Party, but his D.C. enemies treat him like he is

    Every now and then I stumble upon a column which says exactly what I had been thinking but had not yet written.

    Christian Whiton absolutely is on target as to the reasons behind the collective and almost uniform piling on of Newt by the Republican pundit and political class which supports Mitt Romney, Why Washington Is Shocked, Shocked By Newt Gingrich’s Rise Over Mitt Romney.

    Whiton’s theory is that while Newt may be of Washington, he is not a creature of the current Republican political and punditry establishment, and is someone who will do much more than move around the chairs at the same D.C. feeding trough.

    This excerpt doesn’t do the column justice, but it will give a flavor, so by all means read the whole thing:

    … Gingrich has the audacity to imagine that Washington can be run without his own party’s establishment. Their assumption of dominating the next Republican administration is not safe if it is Gingrich. He is not  proposing to replace the Democratic piano player at the brothel that is  Washington with a slightly sterner-sounding Republican. Instead, he claims he will close the brothel. And the establishment of his own party just knows that can’t happen. In their lives, it never has. And where are they then to go for  their pork and porking?

    The establishment may still prevail. There are nearly infinite news cycles until the nomination is won by someone. Gingrich’s opponents are not close to giving up and serious Wall Street money is falling squarely behind Romney.

    Whiton also has one of the best lines of the campaign season, as part of an explanation how the “smart” punditry did not see it coming (emphasis mine):

    Back in our capital city, Jennifer Rubin, the Republican at the Washington Post,  congratulated herself noting “I suggested that Republicans ‘could pull a name out of a hat and find a more consistent and personally stable conservative’ than Newt Gingrich. Many smart conservatives seem to agree.” Maybe Ms. Rubin should start listening to people she thinks are dumb.

    The abuse and disdain being heaped on Newt resembles the abuse and disdain heaped on the Tea Party movement, and comes from the very same people. That may help explain why Newt is so popular with Tea Party supporters compared with Romney.

    Newt may not be Tea Party, but his D.C. enemies treat him like he is. Maybe they’re onto something.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    This Newt mania is getting crazy. The so-called establishment is almost uniformly horrified by the prospect of Newt’s becoming the nominee not because he is some sort of unreliable outsider insider but precisely because he has been the ultimate insider for 40 years during which time everyone involved in or closely following politics had had the chance to discover first hand how intemperate, volatile, narcissistic, and borderline nutty the guy is. Not to mention that half the time the guy has taken positions to the left of many Democrats.

    It is one thing to make a case for Newt. It is really out of line to gloss over his many and obvious flaws and pretend that he is some sort of dream candidate.

      WarEagle82 in reply to JEBurke. | December 10, 2011 at 1:28 pm

      I am fairly sure I agree with everything you just said.

      We have two consummate political insiders claiming to be outsiders running for office and bashing each other over who is NOT the biggest statist, establishment candidate…

      MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to JEBurke. | December 10, 2011 at 1:47 pm

      Half the time Newt has taken positions to the left of many Democrats? Really? Forget “half” the time. I’d like you to provide a single example of a bill Newt voted on that was “left of many Democrats”. You’re bloviating hyperbolic nonsense.

      Because if you look at actual facts, such as his voting record, you will see that Newt racked up a lifetime ACU score of 90 over his entire legislative career of about 20 years. Overwhelmingly right of center. Solidly conservative. How could he be left of Democrats half the time with that voting record? Answer: He wasn’t. You made it up.

      I agree that during the past decade when he was out of office he publicly advocated for some positions that many conservatives do not agree with, including myself. But labeling those positions “left of many Democrats” is ridiculous. You can’t possibly expect anyone to take you seriously, right?

        JEBurke in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | December 10, 2011 at 2:17 pm

        Ooh, you got me. “Half” is hyperbole. How sbout 10 percent in Congress and 20 percent in the 13 years since he was bounced out by his own caucus? And leaning left on some biggies, too.

        So does giving Newt a pass on even 10 percent mean that Romney can get a one in ten pass too? If not, why not.

        And since you mentioned ACA ratings, why does a certain Oklahoma Senator who has racked up a 98 percent conservative voting record get waved off or ravaged as a virtual RINO for testifying that Newt is unstable and saying he could never vote for him?

          Darkstar58 in reply to JEBurke. | December 10, 2011 at 5:10 pm

          So does giving Newt a pass on even 10 percent mean that Romney can get a one in ten pass too? If not, why not.

          Wait, what? 90% is too RINO for you, too – but instead you support a guy who gave us Romneycare, and in-turn, Obamacare?

          And just so you know, Rick Sanatorium is a lifetime 88% from the ACU, where Ron Paul sits at 84%. Bachmann of course has the highest rank, but being there such a short time compared to the others, that’s understandable…

          Anyway, no one will just give Newt a pass on the 10% any more then they will give everyone else a pass on their 12-20% non-conservative tallies.

          BUT, Newt shouldn’t be destroyed for his being “anything but conservative” when he in fact compares favorably to others praised as “Conservative champions”

          MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to JEBurke. | December 10, 2011 at 5:48 pm

          I didn’t “get you”. If you’re going to post a comment using a condescending tone, which is your typical style, while at the same time making the unbelievably ridiculous assertion that Newt takes positions to the left of many Democrats half the time, then you deserve to be called out on it.

          An ACU score of 90% does not mean that Gingrich was “left of the Democrats” on the other 10%. That is absurd. If that’s your assertion, then once again you’re either confused or you are having a problem dealing with actual facts. You also assert that Newt has been to the left of many Democrats on 20% of the issues he’s taken a stand on since he left Congress. That appears to be a fictional statistic that you invented.

          I’ve never defended Gingrich’s personality or his leadership style. I’m less concerned about this leadership style than his leadership direction. To that end, I’ve only examined his actual voting record and his prospective legislative agenda as documented in his 21st Century Contract With America. So I really don’t understand why Coburn’s comments about Gingrich’s leadership style is relevant to my comments. I also don’t know why you claiming that someone else called Coburn a RINO for not supporting Newt’s candidacy is relevant — to anything, really.

          Finally, since you did bring up Coburn, I’m not aware that he ever referred to Newt as “unstable” as you assert. Coburn called Newt “brilliant but divisive” on CSPAN in March, and he said he found Newt’s leadership “lacking”
          in an interview on Fox News Sunday last week. When did he call him unstable?

          Further, Coburn did not say he could “never” vote for Newt if he’s the GOP nominee. Coburn simply said he would not support Newt’s candidacy. The vast majority of Newt’s primary supporters will vote for Romney in the general election if Romney is the nominee. And visa versa. I don’t know if Coburn will vote for Newt if he’s the nominee in the general election. Neither do you. But to conflate not supporting Newt’s candidacy with “he could never vote for him” is an illogical leap.

            JEBurke in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | December 10, 2011 at 9:06 pm

            You know perfectly well what I mean by Newt’s leaning left on some issues. If Romney had made a video with Nancy Pelosi at Al Gore’s invitation, you guys would use it as proof certain that Mitt should be written off. That alone would be enough to sink him. Yet, it’s no big deal for Newt. Nor is his path to “legalization” or any other stand he’s tsken.

            As for hyperbole, if you can’t take hyperbole in a political debate, you should stay away from politics — and especially stop listening to Newt who is hyperbolic every other time he opens his mouth.

    […] to Rearrange Deck Chairs On the Titanic Posted on December 10, 2011 7:30 pm by Bill Quick » Newt may not be Tea Party, but his D.C. enemies treat him like he is – Le·gal In·sur·rec… Christian Whiton absolutely is on target as to the reasons behind the collective and almost […]

    valleyforge | December 11, 2011 at 1:18 am

    It’s instructive to note that Gingrich’s contemporary counterparts in the Senate, Bob Dole and Trent Lott, are now high-powered lobbyists and power brokers (and not necessarily only for Republicans let alone conservatives). Gingrich could easily have chosen the same path but didn’t. Gingrich’s right hand in the House, Dick Armey, also took the road less traveled, founding FreedomWorks and becoming one of the earliest sponsors of the Tea Party.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend