It seems to me that I have a duty to write about Newt Gingrich, as I am one who did not think his rise in the polls as a Republican presidential contender would be as durable as it already has been. As interesting as Newt himself is the dumbfounded reaction to his return to the grand tier of political life after a sleep almost as long as Rip Van Winkle’s, and after he had flat-lined for months as a candidate, and had been abandoned by his entire staff. In a year that should be a big Republican sweep, all the more probable and popular Republicans — and the hopeful sprouts of enthusiasm for a sequence of non–Mitt Romneys (Bachmann, Perry, Christie, and Cain) — fizzled, were snuffed out in a pandemic of foot-in-mouth disease, or were pulverized by the wall of fire from the liberal assassination squads. Then Newt levitated like a Frankenstein monster, with Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins shrieking in horror and in excitement: “It’s alive!”
I do not believe that the proverbial Republican base is so perverse or shell-shocked that Newt really is, in these terms, alive. And I write as someone who actually knows Newt Gingrich and his good qualities a little, and, to the extent my acquaintance enables me to comment, likes him; respects his eclectic but effervescent intelligence; and renders him great credit for inaugurating an era of Republican preeminence in Congress.
Advertisement
There is nothing left to be said about the vagaries of his public personality. Old stand-bys like “stormy petrel,” “loose cannon,” and “unguided missile” are not nearly adequate. The delightful Peggy Noonan comes closest, with “He’s a human hand grenade who walks around with his hand on the pin, saying ‘Watch this!’” Where speaking about himself, philosophizing, or discussing almost anything except the performance of the incumbent administration, he is likely to say anything. Dipping lightly into the Newt sampler — from complaining about his seat on Air Force One, to praising Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, to pronouncing himself the “definer of civilization” — we see that anything can happen. He is an interesting character with a hyperactive personality who made a difference. He proved not to be a good parliamentarian, and he conforms to Richard Nixon’s summary, on returning from abroad in 1964, of sophisticated European thinking about Barry Goldwater: “A nut, a kook, a jerk.”
Since Newt Gingrich is a completely unfeasible president, the question pops up, like a cobra’s head, of why he is now the leading contender for the Republican nomination. In the desperation created by this glazed pall of implausibility that has anesthetized the Republicans, I offer an alternative explanation. We are witnessing the Hegelian dialectic in action, a rare and unfashionable occurrence, yet appropriate to such an epochal farce as this. (If Newt can be Lazarus for a month, the roots of Marxism can be briefly verdant again.) Fighting an administration whose three cardinal projects were Obamacare, an $800 billion economic-stimulus plan, and cap-and-trade — i.e. two disasters and a scheme so harebrained not even a Pelosified Congress could take it — the Republicans are swimming downstream on pelagic trillions of budgetary deficits, and still haven’t been able to get their best candidates to take the plunge. The office is not seeking, and the nation is not turning its lonely eyes toward, Willard M. Romney, widely perceived as a plastic policy weather vane and incorrect health-care champion who was mean to the family dog.
After the rise and decapitation of each non-Mitt, the frustrations of the average reasonable Republican or independent who loves America and is horrified by the most incompetent administration since that of James Buchanan (who at least had the decency not to seek reelection) seem to have become explosive and irrational. But this is misleading. Inconceivable though Newt is as president, he is an articulate and forceful critic of the administration and not just an O’Reilly-Hannity impersonator. Newt sees it plain, calls it straight, and gets the sleep-deprived Republicans halfway home by tearing the incumbents limb from limb. But there’s more: He is such a cyclonic change of pace, he is a non-Mitt who can actually stay the course and stop Mittification from happening. Never mind that he won’t fly himself, he can keep the nomination open for someone who can, who couldn’t face having to campaign for a year and spend $100 million to be nominated.
If the race comes down to Romney and Huntsman as you suggest might happen, I wonder if those saying anyone but Mitt would actually pull the lever for Huntsman over Romney. There is a widespread belief that Huntsman is a moderate or even a Liberal, even though his record as Governor and his platform of ideas are to the right of Gingrich's record and platform. I don't know if he can over come that misconception given some peoples, including his own at times, willingness and desire to stoke that misconception.
IF it's those two by the time the NY primary rolls around -- a big if -- I'd change my registration and vote for Huntsman in a heartbeat.
People who contemplate Mitt's dilemma in the GOP primary woefully underestimate just how much conservatives loathe even looking at him, let alone hearing him talk.
Anyone but Romney means precisely that. Nothing more, nothing less.
Anyone -- But -- Romney. It's probably the easiest statement to comprehend that I can think of.
If you listen to the voices of leader in the anyone but Romney movement, they seem to dislike Huntsman even more. The exception being Erick Erickson.
Rush Limbaugh has even gone as far as to say that all the candidates including Romney, but except Huntsman and Paul would be a significant improvement over Obama. Rush hasn't declared himself against Romney, but he has been taking some thinly veiled shots at him.
Actually he called Romney the candidate who "represents all three legs of the Conservative stool" unlike McCain or Huckabee who were lacking in one way or another. He even said after the primaries were over that he voted for Romney in the Florida primary.
He has done a bit of a flip-flop on Romney. Just a few days ago he said the "establishment" was trying to nominate "McCain Jr.", I don't think he was talking about Newt.
I think Huntsman will make a fine President if he were to be elected, honestly I like his tax plan a lot, it might be the best of the candidates. And as someone who has spent a majority of my adult life in the far east, I think Huntsman is actually right on issues with China, and many of the other candidates are playing to popular opinion on the issue and would have to change positions once on office. And he would be very electable, it would be hard for Obama to attack someone as a rightwing extremist or a nut that he hired but didn't fire, and attacking is what Obama must to do to be reelected. But I just don't see people warming up to him, a lot of people will have to say they were wrong about him, a lot of them with very large egos to protect.
Huntsman has said several things that alienated the GOP base:
1. He accepts that anthropogenic global warming is really occurring, and has proposed conservation measures to deal with it. That's a liberal Democratic position.
2. He said that the main thing wrong with Obama's stimulus package was that it should have been even bigger (!!!). On that issue, that puts Huntsman on the same page as Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, who aren't exactly conservatives.
3. He and his campaign manager have strongly implied that the GOP base is wacko.
In short, Huntsman tried to make political space for himself by running to the left of the other candidates on the stimulus and global warming issues.
But running to the left is no way to appeal to the GOP base.
No offense, but anyone who thinks Hunstman is a mod or a liberal isn't paying attention. He has the second-most right-wing fiscal platform and is extremely pro-life. On foreign policy, he's focused on strategic issues like preventing Chinese ascendancy, not on spending a trillion dollars fighting a civil war for the pashtuns. He is a lifelong diplomat with more experience than anyone else
The reason he is a moderate is because Rush and FOX news said so. He is cordial to the other side and is non-
Inflammatory...that's terrible for ratings. Before you bash Huntsman, our best option (and I'm a Paul backer), you should probably know what you're talking about.
Didn't Huntsman have a Republican-dominated congress during his tenure as Governor? Just as Romney had a Democrat-dominated (87%) congress during his tenure.
I think we have to KEEP THAT IN MIND in trying to determine who's more conservative.
Mr. Black your observations are refreshing and accurate as usual. I always enjoy reading your opinions and I too am hopeful that someone at the last minute will rescue us. I would love to have Jeb Bush be our next President. But their family has put up with enough slander and defamation of character. It wouldnt be fair to put them through that again. Jeb is very articulate and experienced. He is a leader...I pray we are given better choices than what we have now although I do like Bachman too.
I strongly disagree with your hypothesis that Jeb Bush may be the last second candidate. He wrote one piece in the Wall Street Journal last week, imitating Rush Limbaugh, and that seems to be your speculation. Pitiful, another fiscal liberal Bush. No thank you.
There is nothing delightful about Peggy Noonan, a RINO that voted for Barack Obama.
Things sound delightful at your country club Mr. Black, but the government requires reform and making DC less consequential in the lives of man. Rick Perry was right, the scam artists in DC should only work part-time.
I am getting the feeling that we have lost the ability to recognize what a truly great leader a creative visionary like Newt Gingrich would make. We are foundering in a swamp of conventional thinking. We seem to be seeking the perfect bus driver rather than an president.
What other candidates have Gingrich’s historic record of leadership?
Perhaps have seen too much TV and too many movies with actors sporting granite faces and basso profondo voices depicting “Great Leaders”. Perhaps the election process itself, favors command presence over protean genius. Few great presidents of the past could survive the venomous slanders that descend like locusts on whoever the front runner is at the moment. Perhaps the electronic media has metastasized a defect in our system that formerly grew too slowly be malignant. Most commentators, and voters, seem unable to separate facts from suppositions, and repeat the latest received opinions rather than construct their own analysis.
I have read National Review for decades. The recent coverage of Gingrich has been that great magazine’s darkest hour. It has revealed an underbelly of repellant nastiness, a ventral gland secreting pole-cat perfume. If NR had a case against him they could have used the truth rather than aromatic slander.
These days I walking around with a broken heart. I feel like have lost my best friend.
As you quoted, “not because the man is not a hero, but because the valet is only a valet.”
We are a nation of valets and are about to have one for our next president.
You wrote "Newt sees it plain, calls it straight, and gets the sleep-deprived Republicans halfway home by tearing the incumbents limb from limb."
This is a big reason why he's gained such improbably (given his well known baggage) traction with so many voters. Many, many People have 'had it up to here!' with Democrats lying, and the media covering for them and framing their questions and interviews of Republicans in the cloying posture of a clever but deluded teenage pseudo-intellectual. Newt 'called out the media' (and did it skillfully), landing body blows and causing bloody noses, and he is effortlessly articulate in describing his positions - which suggests someone who actually believes what he's saying, not reciting a memorized and poll-tested refrain.
People like that he FIGHTS! - they're tired of having no voice in their government, and they perceive that Newt gives voice to their millions who don't have a microphone, only jobs to perform and tax bills to pay (this same longing is partly what made Sarah Palin such a force - she gave voice to the unsung millions who believe in the traditional America and can see it being stolen away) .... and they believe he'll FIGHT for them.
Couldn't have said it better! I'm sick and tired of these bone heads telling us why so-and-so isn't electable or is not a good candidate. What's called analysis is simply negativism it's own sake.
Newt attacks the media but he also attacks Obama, Mitt would never call Obama a Saul Alinsky radical like Newt does. Conservative do not like Romney's weakness. He is playing not to lose, he is not playing offense.
Romneycare is a huge problem, Mitt continues to stand by it saying it is right for MA. Does the media ever point out how much federal funding is required to keep it going? It's Mitts' turn, most in the media and certainly the cocktail party establishment want him to be the nominee.
Sadly, the conservative bench strengh is strong but most are new on the scene or opted not to run. 2012 is the election, we cannot wait until 2016, can you imagine what Obama would do if given another term? We must focus on the Senate, House and Governor races we will need strong governors to stand up to DC (Pence as an example would be good, I would have preferred he entered the presidential race but we definitely need him in a strong leadership role). Can someone else jump into the presidential race, perhaps, Ryan has already said no same with Daniels, sorry Jeb Bush would not stand a chance just his last name would do him in. I wish Rubio had a full term under his belt but right now we have to choose from the candidates who have entered the race.
The generic cries for "fight" were used repeatedly by Ms. Bachmann in her early debate performances. The enormous lack of substance hiding behind emotive pleas designed to play to frustrations sank her offering rather quickly.
When one needs a job done, they simply do not hire the emotional placation artist who "sucks up" for the job. They look for a proven Candidate who has the basis, reason, soundness, ability, substance, experience, etc. Again, this is not for a local Congressional Seat in the House, but for the Executive.
Newt's horrible record as Speaker, revealing very poor leadership skills, obsessed with self interest is a sincere problem. Newt Gingrich is the Icon of entrenched Beltway Celebrity Insiders - he will lose any National Election he is entered in. He lacks executive experience, private sector ability, economic insight, an attractive record, a stable mindset, etc.
Newt's cracking immediately in the spotlight, his mindless effort to deny his Washington Influence Peddling via some absurd anti-Capitalist rant which mimicked Obama was just another sign of his dreadful offering.
We're tired of our so-called representatives pussyfooting around, walking on eggshells, treating the media and the Democrats as though they had any interest whatsoever in civility or a 'fair' fight.
Romney doesn't even have the guts to call Obama what he is, a socialist. Yet, we're supposed to believe that Romney has the spine to stand up against the media and the professional Left and face the Democrats on their own turf. It will never happen.
No offense, but this rambling essay is quite unconvincing.
It is amazing to witness supposedly intelligent commentators declare that the presidential primary process is broken, before even one vote officially has been cast.
Mr. Black is, thus, a wee bit premature on the disaster scenarios he conjures at the end of his column. These were precipitated by an inability to fathom Republicans picking Newt.
That's so odd. I mean, why would a political party ever elevate someone to be its titular leader who has done more than any single individual to advance the party's aims and agenda?
Better to advance someone who has perpetuated the old GOP minority squad, or who has spent a career apologizing for the conservative philosophy and finding any possible way to advance the other side's agenda, albeit at a slower pace.
Add Mr. Black to the fast-growing list of conservative commentators who are at loggerheads with the mood and spirit of both conservative GOP and conservative independent voters.
