This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
For Republicans Newt Gingrich is the Only Choice
A number of people have been asking me about the 2012 election and who I will support. I am a member of the libertarian wing of the Republican Party where Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan happily reside. No surprise then that I support Newt Gingrich for the Republican presidential nomination.
After graduating from Villanova University in 1981, I worked for the Heritage Foundation and later for Congressman Jack Kemp (R-NY) as a writer for the Republican Conference Committee. My first real awareness of Gingrich as a political leader came in 1984, when he took the attack to the Democrats onto the floor of the House. He did so in such a way as to provoke a personal reprimand from Speaker Tim O’Neill, who took the floor to attack Gingrich.
But his post-luncheon bluster got the better of Tip O’Neill, who was censured for his remarks in one of the great parliamentary maneuvers in modern American politics. The drama was captured by David Osborne in Mother Jones:
“Immediately, Minority Whip Trent Lott rose and asked that the Speaker's words be ruled out of order and stricken from the record. In the House, normally a bastion of civility, members are forbidden from making personal attacks on one another. After five minutes of nervous consultation, the chair ruled in Lott's favor. That night, the confrontation between Gingrich and O'Neill made all three network news programs. The third-term Republican from Georgia had arrived.”
For a young Republican, that public takedown of Tip O’Neill more than a quarter century ago presaged the end of an era politically, the end of Democratic fiat and the real beginning of Republican insurgency. I watched on CSPAN as Republicans led by the three term congressman from Georgia retook control of the House of Representatives for the first time in the post-WWII era.
For Republicans interested in winning the 2012 election and changing the direction of the country, the decision comes down to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney vs. former House Speaker Gingrich from Georgia. As expected the Big Media ignored the great Texas libertarian, Rep. Ron Paul. None of the other Republican candidates beside Gingrich and Romney, in my view, has the ability to win a national election for the Grand Old Party and, more important, to govern and lead the nation effectively.
Say what you want about Romney’s competence, which I respect as a fellow bankster, but he is still a northeastern liberal who as president would likely pander to the largest banks and corporations. Terms such as “status quo” come to mind with Romney. Newt Gingrich, on the other hand, just might start channeling Teddy Roosevelt and break up the big bank cartel in the US housing market.
Romney did dismantle a lot of private corporations during his years running Bain Capital, boosting shareholder value. He also destroyed a lot of jobs along the way, but I cannot see leveraged buyout king Mitt Romney really challenging the corporate status quo in Washington.
Romney is on the record as a bailout denier and overt apologist for the large bank subsidies and rescues put in place by Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner. The comparison between Romney and Gingrich’s critical view of the Wall Street bailouts is pretty striking. Gingrich has called for swift action to punish the key players behind the financial crisis, something that should garner support from many points of the political compass.
"If they want to really change things, the first person to fire is (Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben) Bernanke, who is a disastrous chairman of the Federal Reserve, the second person to fire is (Treasury Secretary Timothy) Geithner," Gingrich said in the Republican debate sponsored by Bloomberg and the Washington Post.
The first issue for me with Gingrich is experience, both in terms of domestic economic and political policy. As noted, Gingrich and my friend Grover Norquist led the first successful GOP House campaign in 40 years and the first re-election of a Republican majority in the House since 1928.
Gingrich worked with members of both parties as Speaker to cut taxes and spending, and understands how to make the government sausage factory work. He collaborated with conservative leaders like Kemp, Jude Wanniski and Art Laffer, to make supply-side economics a viable response to the Great Society welfare state in Washington.
Gingrich, Kemp and many other conservatives I first got to know through my parents in the 1980s and 1990s worked with Ronald Reagan on defeating the Soviet empire and renewing the US economy. Gingrich has been involved with national policy for decades while Romney was governor of Massachusetts for one term, where he did little to change that state’s unique culture of corruption and astronomically high tax rates.
Gingrich understands the scale of change required in government today. He has tackled welfare reform, four balanced budgets, Medicare reform, and the largest capital gains tax cut in history. The proposal for Social Security and Medicare by Gingrich rejects the idea that we can solve our budget and debt crisis by some combination of cutting benefits and raising taxes within the current framework of these two programs.
Romney has a very limited record when it comes to proposing change to these largest components of the federal government. Gingrich actually understands the issues involved in running the American political economy and can speak about them in detail, as shown in the debates and in other public forums, as well with his proposals for change.
The second issue is conservative vision. Newt Gingrich is a consistent advocate for conservative American values such as individual liberty and responsibility, while Romney is a “born again” conservative of recent vintage. From the Contract With America to his latest venture, American Solutions for Winning the Future, Gingrich has provided leadership in terms of generating a broader, non-partisan discussion on political and economic issues.
Jack Kemp said famously: “Be a leader.” Gingrich does that and more, but he also has the intellectual credentials to back up the rhetorical theater that is American politics. Gingrich is the author of dozens of books, many of which he actually wrote. He has the ability to learn and understand complex domestic and geopolitical issues.
For over two decades, Gingrich has taught at the United States Air Force's Air University, where he is the longest-serving teacher of the Joint Flag Officer Warfighting Course. He was the third witness at opening House hearing on Goldwater-Nichols legislation, which created a joint operations culture in the US military and streamlined political control over the American armed forces.
The Goldwater-Nichols legislation had enormous practical and political ramifications, some driven by technology but others by political concerns about the supremacy of civilian rule in post-WWII Washington. We need a President who understands these complex issues. Richard Hofstadter wrote about the anti-intellectualism in American life, but out citizens are ready for a President who knows issues in detail and also knows what he does not understand.
The third issue is pragmatic conservatism. While Gingrich is guided by many of the core libertarian principles set forth by the founders of our republic, he is also someone who identifies problems in a frank and objective way, then seeks practical answers. His willingness to be a bold change agent versus a manager of the status quo is a key component that differentiates Newt Gingrich from Mitt Romney, and most of the other Republican candidates this year.
Yet even as Americans try to undo decades of socialist construction at the hands of both political parties, we need to do so in such a way that does not destabilize the economy and creates an environment that will foster confidence and new private sector growth. Gingrich believes that fostering an open discussion about the many policy issues we all face is the way to break the cycle of corruption and dysfunction in Washington.
“In an age where massive pieces of legislation are written in secret and passed before anyone has time to understand their contents, it is my hope that this open process of developing the 21st Century Contract With America will help restore the bonds of trust between the American people and their elected representatives,” Mr. Gingrich writes in 21st Century Contract With America.
The other issue which demonstrates the pragmatic approach that Gingrich takes to issues is immigration. Speaking as someone who is descended from immigrants and who has worked and traveled in nations all around the Americas, we need to be more sensitive to the plight of undocumented aliens. But more than that, Gingrich and other conservatives need to advance solutions to the problem of undocumented aliens and thereby eliminate an obstacle to winning majority Hispanic support for Republican candidates.
When you look at Romney’s anti-immigrant stance, he almost seems to be mutating into the Richard Nixon of “silent majority” fame, threatening to keep out the evil illegal aliens. Romney’s position is hypocritical, however, because his own Mormon ancestors fled the anti-polygamy laws in the US in the late 1800s for the more permissive climes of Northern Mexico – only to be chased back across the border by the violence of the 1910 Mexican revolution.
Romney’s Mormon ancestors returned to the US across the same porous Mexican border that admits thousands of illegal immigrants each year. Did they cross into the US legally? Should we deport Mitt and his family back to Coahuila?
Romney’s tough guy stance on immigration, juxtaposed with his unusual family history, makes him a sitting duck for Democrats in a general election campaign. We need Republicans who will work with the Hispanic community, not give them reasons to vote against us.
Gingrich has proposed a workable pathway to legal residency and full integration into US society for illegal aliens in terms of taxes and social services, but one that also recognizes the fact that many illegal workers will eventually return to their native lands. Like Gingrich, I feel that only legal émigrés who follow the law should be eligible for citizenship. But neither should we turn economic refugees into a permanent underclass.
America needs to create a way for workers from Canada, Mexico and other nations of the Americas to work in the US, pay taxes and receive needed services, and be part of the formal economy wherever they ultimately reside. And US citizens would benefit from such reciprocity in the other American states and the legal protections afforded by such state-to-state relations.
I think Newt Gingrich could make the vision of a transparent, open marketplace for labor in the Americas a reality. He has the sort of intellectual honesty and willingness to risk change that could address intractable issues like immigration, the economy and anti-competitive behavior in the economy. And Newt Gingrich rejects the socialist policies of the American left, led by the likes of Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, who believe that people who work with their minds are somehow criminals.
If you really listen to his whining socialist diatribes, Paul Krugman is the enemy of every man and woman who works in the global financial markets. Many of my colleagues on the Street are very liberal, yet Krugman would take all of their money via higher taxes in a nanosecond. How is it that nobody sees that Krugman’s commentaries in The New York Times are almost perfectly predicted by George Orwell in Animal Farm – and Hayek in the The Road to Serfdom?
To me Newt is the only credible conservative in the presidential race for 2012, but one who brings a mixture of core American values, real world experience and a pragmatic, compassionate approach to a range of issues. Gingrich wants to facilitate real change in America, while Romney only wants to run the welfare state better. And Newt Gingrich is not afraid to call Barack Obama a socialist in a national presidential debate. That is why I support Newt Gingrich for the Republican nomination for the presidency.
»
- rcwhalen's blog
- 45107 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Gingrich is just another sold out statist banker toady. He would not know a conservative impulse, if it bit him. He's never proposed eliminating the income tax, repealing the patriot act, or closing the federal reserve. His administration would just be more of the same, in the Bush mold. The only way he looks conservative, is if you contrast him with socialists, and if you completely ignore his personal life.
Newt is the problem not the solution - to hell with academics. Being Speaker of the House didn't stop him from conspiring with the Clinton to rob the American people and Social Security.
Anyone that supports this globalist nonsense of man made warming and is friends with Pelosi is a true snake.
Gingrich is a globalist puss sucking maggot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuBd1atfhQ4
Really, so Gingrich “understands how to make the government sausage factory work”. Well given if my local butcher had unlimited access to pork as in the government’s case, he could conceivably make Jimmy Dean look like a rank amateur! This brings us precisely to Ron Paul’s point that as an American people we have been duped into taking the sausage for far too long.
Gingrich is an asshole of the first order - a lying, scheming, sociopath who would sell his own mother to advance his cause. His cause being his own enrichment.
"A stupid persons idea of what a smart person sounds like" is the best description I've heard of this prick.
Ronald Reagan the libertarian? Interesting interpretation of history...
I like RP, however he has ZERO chance of winning the nomination, let alone the election.
Any takers on this one?
Well, it's perfectly reasonable to expect Ron Paul to win a nomination (and even election) if you think there's a large groundswell of active Republicans who will get together and force the existing party machinery to make it happen.
So uh...yep, I'm with ya....zero/zero.
Sure.
Ron Paul has a much better organized campaign than last election, the party talking points are his and have always been his and now the Rs are trying to co-opt them, there are more liberals and progressives that have jumped ship on Obama and will vote Ron Paul when given the chance, the only information people get about their politics is from the main stream media (which has been proven to marginalize and ignore him pissing off many) that is clueless about outcomes of races and their polls are of landline voters which are typically middle age and older who have towed party lines and are not representative of the populace, people are tired of War which gains nothing and the present chief lied about withdrawing, OWS knows the big O is a corporate shill and so is any other candidate besides Ron Paul (who hasn't called them socialist kids asking for handouts that need showers), Ron Paul has been right predicting collapses and policy blunders like blowback, people are tired of liars and because Ron Paul has predicted problems and tells the truth to Americans they're far more likely to vote for him, people are tired of the two party do nothing system and he's been speaking against both parties and their policies for decades...
I'd keep going but you probably won't care anyway as your "party" allegiance won't let you. People that don't care about truth and liberty would never vote for Ron Paul.
There is a SLIM chance, if RP hangs in there through Iowa and New Hampshire, and if the European crisis spreads rapidly and impacts our banks here, that the panic may drive votes to Dr. Paul. I don't think the odds are good, but I will say that if enough sheep are driven into a state of panic, and if they can't ignore reality anymore, that the guy with the only solutions that will actually fix the problem may prevail. We'll see.
I disagree that panic drives votes to Paul, but logic and concern for future of country should.
Should, but doesn't. Don't misunderstand; I like Ron Paul. I agree with his views. But Americans aren't going to want to take their medicine until they're convinced that they're dying of cancer.
Oh, and they WILL know they're dying of cancer before the end of 2012. The question is, will they know soon enough to nominate Ron Paul to run against Obamaniac.
R.C. Whalen trying to sugar coat a turd (politician) wrapped around a sewer system (democratic Govt)
you can't save this sack of shit Mr Whalen from the collective combined Centuries of stinking rotten failure
...the time has come for change which includes binning windbags like Gingrich, the rotten, corrupt to the core, festering failure that is GOP and the destructive monopoly and root of all social and economic evil, Govt
Wake up and smell reality you pickled zombie.. go home and think again if your tired peanut of a brain is capable of thinking outside the box (or is it portaloo?)
I know! Did this just seriously happen?! WTF Zero Hedge?! Were you hacked? This whole article is the DEFINITION of empty political propaganda. "Newt believes in a strong America! Newt will fix immigration! Newt will cure your infertility (by sleeping with your wife)! Newt defeated the Soviet Union - with his dick!"
It was so full of fluff and propagandized language that I could barely read it. Was this pulled directly from his website? Not to mention, as others have, that he's hardly a libertarian. Or that you give a one line dismissal of the only REAL libertarian candidate who, by the way, is beating Newt in virtually every single poll.
I've never seen something so stupid and manipulative on ZH in two years of reading this site. You should be banned as a contributor for trying to use this awesome site to promote your MSM shilled bullcrap. I come to ZH specifically to AVOID garbage like this. I was actually ready to hear a reasoned defense of Gingrich as a candidate, given the caliber of most writing here. If this is the best that can be said for him, I'd rather see another Obama term simply so that the libertarian cause isn't permanently defiled by this kind of garbage.
Whalen's a tremendous bank analyst. He has a phenomenal understanding of the "financial crisis" from the perspective of the bankers who engineered it. He is THE GUY to listen to about the state of banking. This place isn't supposed to just list endless repetition from like-minded individuals. (We already see too much more of the same from several featured authors.)
So Whalen has an opinion about the election you don't prefer?
Fuckin' deal with it.
Wrong. I have no problem with someone differing in their opinions. It's when they spout mindless propaganda that I have a problem. The above was simply a diatribe of his republican "credentials" entirely lacking in substance. And it makes Whalen look like a shill and a hack.
Like I said, I was all for hearing a reasoned defense of Gingrich as a candidate. But this isn't a reasoned argument in favor of newt's platform; it's an attempt to hit all the cliches necessary to get an emotional reaction from uninformed readers. A phrase like "we need leadership" in a political context like this is utterly vacuous. What we need is a specific plan of what we can do to get this country back to what it should be (if that's even possible at this point).
Only Ron Paul has that. Were there another candidate out there with a reasoned set of ideas - besides more statism - I'd give them a fair shake too, even if that vision differed substantially from RP. If that's what newt is doing, there's not even the slightest sign of it here. He's shown himself unprincipled, unethical, and ideologically inconsistent, and the only positives for him are the above sparkling generalities, and that he is a talented speaker.
When your choices are between 5 guys who want to continue down the same destructive path we've been on, and one guy who actually wants the country to follow the Constitution, it's not a matter of differing opinions. It's a matter of patriotism vs treason. So you deal with it.
Excellent response, d_senti.
I concur completely.
Zerohedge will post troll stories here and there. I am positive its just for entertainment value at the crazy comments that come out of the wood work and the people who don't understand. I'll bet you $1 million on the purposeful trolling if you don't believe.
Indeed --- hence the former statist, Keynesian bullshit articles by leo kovilakis.
Gingrich said at a book signing the government should let the terrorists win once in awhile. Which says to me he is a warmonger and wants to keep the war machine going.
I saw him say that as well. He was saying it tongue-in-cheek but I think your assessment of his statement is correct. He would like to see the American people kept on edge and fearful so that they continue to support the endless wars which are the revenue streams for the Military Industrial Complex.
Krugman a socialist? That's quite funny. On the other hand, he's been right on numerous issues:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/307635-what-if-paul-krugman-is-right-par...
["f you really listen to his whining socialist diatribes, Paul Krugman is the enemy of every man and woman who works in the global financial markets. Many of my colleagues on the Street are very liberal, yet Krugman would take all of their money via higher taxes in a nanosecond. How is it that nobody sees that Krugman’s commentaries in The New York Times are almost perfectly predicted by George Orwell in Animal Farm – and Hayek in the The Road to Serfdom?"]
A bit of an exaggeration, that. It easier said than demonstrated. Krugman has also been right on many issues:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/307635-what-if-paul-krugman-is-right-par...
WTF?
Is today April 1st?
Did my watch break?
Fuck that noise.
Who is this guy? Newt four more years of the same obomba beruh bull dong! Newt what a joke
VOTE with your heart for the salvation of the republic= Dr RON PAUL..... or vote with your feet
Whalen and Gingrich for president and vice-president... of Rwanda. Or given a time machine, nazi germany.
LePetomane 2012
Harrumph!
The man is the reincarnation of Sydney Greenstreet. There are not enough porters in the world to carry Newt's baggage. He's a classic narcissistic sociopath.
Ron Paul or no one.
Roger that! Newt will bring a new American flavor and level to totalitarian fascism. If Ron Paul doesn't win, we're in for a pretty rough storm, one which will likely tear the country to pieces. Get ready, the decision between flight or fight may take a disturbing turn. Anyone who isn't terrified of where we are headed truly doesn't understand the reality and the lessons history has shown us.
The author says he is of the libertarian wing of the GOP and then says he supports Gingrich? This guy either doesn't understand anything about libertarian ideas, or doesn't understand who Newt Gingrich is. Remember that commercial he did with Pelosi a few years back? Oh yeah, NOW Newt says it was a stupid thing to do. But lets not kid ourselves, Newt has long called for mandating health insurance just like we mandate auto insurance. He has long called for carbon taxes and for cap and trade. Newt voted for higher taxes on many occasions. He has stated that he supported TARP. He supported and promoted Bush's prescription drug program. Now it comes out that he was getting paid by Freddie and Fannie. Whalen is clearly either clueless or deceitful, or both. Why is this guy given the time of day on what is supposed to be a platform for clear thinking, non-sheeple, individuals?
Parts 1 & 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8FcGyaWCFE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpJRdGrdneg
Who is Newt Gingrich? Must Watch Video For Supportershttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5ZU1AcWu2w
Newt Gingrich: The Establishment’s Conservative
He's pathetic. His swagger is incredibly off-putting, especially since he is so often just plain fucking wrong.
This is sad...I've aways respected Whalen's opinion. Now I know he's just a right wing/bible thumping shill. Shame on you for stoop-eding yourself for such unworthy cause!!!!!!!!!!!
Question for your Idicy, Mr whalen. Who fought tooth and nail the Financial Regulatory Reform and watered it down that, as it stands, is useless? Now Fuck OFF
"No surprise then that I support Newt Gingrich for the Republican presidential nomination."
That's where I stopped reading.
Come on guys, ZH is too smart to not know this is garbage and isnt that desperate for content. Possibly just gets a kick out the well deserved flaming they get in the comments.
More comments about the Not...I mean Newt:
"He talks endlessly about self-reliance and local initiative, but he represents Cobb County, an affluent white-flight suburb of Atlanta that is the third-largest recipient of federal funds of any suburb in the nation--57% over the national average."
"Gingrich loves to beat up on welfare mothers, who he claims are ripping off the taxpayers, but his district is a perfect example of the welfare state for the rich. The biggest employer, the engine that drove the county's rapid development, was Lockheed, a mega-recipient of defense contracts. He even lobbied the feds to approve the sale of Lockheed's jets to Moammar Kadafi in Libya."
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-11-27/opinion/op-2138_1_newt-gingrich
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Congressman Ron Paul debate the Patriot Act and its implications for America.
Do we repeal the act, as Ron Paul would prefer, or do we strengthen it to further expand the government’s anti-terrorism capabilities?
I'm not interested in perpetual war. People of this "we are always in danger" crisis mentality are sick and will use this logic to justify any and all measures typically associated with a police state.
Right on. I've lost enough friends "over there" all for the entertainment and distraction provided to a bunch of state dept fools and top-down power hungry aspiring dictators. The people need to put a stop to this madness before we are too powerless to control the outcome. I support freedom and Ron Paul. I will not serve a police state, but will resist it at every opportunity.
Yes. How insane is it that a bunch of crafty, disingenuous predators have convinced hundreds of millions of sheeple to become so afraid of their own shadows that they're willing to turn over the entire future of mankind to predators who prey upon them? These predators are sickos, and the people who believe them are sickos. Oh boy are humans one sicko species.
A "government affairs consultant" is another name for a lobbyist. So says Jack Abramoff.
Jack Meoff?
NUKE NEWT
The FED Must be abolished to go forward. Newt is Not the answer.
Fuck the establishment, I'm voting for Dr Ron Paul and writing his name in if I have to as all the millions of his supporters are going to do as well.
Newt...that fat smug bastard? He's the worst kind of "intellectual"...a pseudo-intellectual. Spouts his "wisdom" as if it's the most obvious thing in the world...except that he's usually DEAD WRONG. He hasn't held public office for 17 years...for good reason. Nazi.
I'm no Obama fan (even though I voted for him over the nutcase housewife from Alaska) but I know who the only candidate should be: Ron Paul.
Newt--more of the same that has brought us to this deplorable and regrettable precipice. It is akin to bloodletting--an accepted practice in its time, but often times ended up killing the already sick patient. Newt is a statist through and through. He's been part of the system that is tearing this country down a brick at a time. Why would anyone but a masochist want more of this? To me we have two choices--significant change NOW (Ron Paul), or baby step changes within context of "more of the same" (Newt). Newt won't save this country. We need a revolutionary change, not baby steps.
newt gingrich is a neonazi pin head who is as beholden to the bankster / big government / fuck the poor people agenda as any other establishment candidate....
his tawdry personal life coupled with that childish temper tantrum he threw in the 1990s on airforce 1 about his seating order show the true mettle of the asshole from georgia....
no more bushes! no more neocons!
Contract-ON-America Gingrich - the skunk that thinks it's a newt.
Wow
Zero Hedge is going down the crapper with content like this.
I nearly spit my coffee all over the screen laughing when I read "No surprise then that I support Newt Gingrich for the Republican presidential nomination."
What a sick joke of an article.