A Few More Thoughts on Newt
My post last night about this weekend's debate generated some thoughtful feedback about Newt Gingrich from our members, my response to which is a little too long to confine to the comments. There are two points I want to hit.
First, I concluded the piece by writing, "Newt never came undone as a campaign strategist. He did so when he had to govern ..." This was sufficiently ominous to strike fear in the hearts of some of our more sober members (including the always-sharp Western Chauvinist). And while my writing it obviously conveys the fact that I consider it a serious issue, I also consider it one that's overblown by Newt's critics.
Newt's failings as a leader were ones of style, not substance. After all, this is the guy who got welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts, and four consecutive balanced budgets. He also shepherded the brilliant idea of running on a contract rather than a platform -- a series of concrete promises to be implemented rather than proposals to be considered. While many of those proposals died in the Senate, the blame for that fact can hardly be laid at Newt's feet. The House Republican Caucus that he presided over passed nearly all of them. And it seems fair to say that it was the last great wave of limited government reform to come out of Washington.
That's not to say that Newt's tenure was misunderstood perfection. He shot his mouth off, mismanaged his caucus, and never fully made the transition from revolutionary to leader. Those facts are troubling but -- particularly given the fact that he's had 15 years to ponder them -- they seem to represent a much more remediable shortcoming than fundamentally flawed priorities. With all the talk about Newt's wonky, idiosyncratic fixations (such as Romney's lunar colony dig the other night), we seem to forget that Newt actually used his tenure (at least at first) to focus on a series of big-ticket reforms that materially changed the relationship between Washington and the rest of the country.
I also find it facile to extrapolate from his time as speaker in order to understand what kind of president he would be. While there are certain constants (the temperament issue), the task of riding herd over 229 Republicans in the House is very different from the demands of being a Commander-in-Chief. Since Newt has never truly served in an executive capacity, it strikes me as a little premature to assume that we know how he'd function in the White House.
Finally, Lucy Pevensie asks me to weigh in on the trend of those who have worked with Newt seeming to disproportionately oppose him. My response to this is similar to the great Yuval Levin's (though I'm considerably more bullish on Newt than Yuval). My work with Newt was rather limited, so I have no great insights into the man behind the scenes. While my knowledge of his work is extensive (I immersed myself in it to write effectively for him), we had little substantive interaction. Like Yuval, however, I found him, in my limited experience, to be perfectly likable and endearing. The most striking thing about Newt is that the guy you see off-stage isn't that different from the guy you see on-stage.
My suspicion where those critics are concerned is that there's a dichotomy at work. Many, perhaps most, are probably motivated by genuine concerns that he's not fit for the office. With others, however, I think there's some schadenfreude at work. For years, mentioning Newt's name in Washington has elicited eye-rolls, no matter whether the listener was Democratic or Republican. There's been a general derision of his sense of his own significance. The prospect of the voting results validating that sense doesn't sit well with those who've used him as a rhetorical pinata for years.
- Comment (65)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Yuval Levin's most damning criticism of Newt is more policy-based. He considers Newt's Medicare reform to be timid at best, feckless at worst -- as does Pete Wehner, the WSJ, and now Avik Roy at NRO. Romney's proposal, on the other hand, is entirely Ryan-compatible -- as Ryan himself says.
This is significant, no? I mean, if the great opportunity presented by this "moment", as Prof. Rahe has said, is to propose, defend, and create a mandate for real, substantive change to the entitlement state, of which Medicare is the most dysfunctional element, then we needn't speculate anymore: Newt's wasting the moment.
(edited to include links)
Edited on Dec 13, 2011 at 5:43amMar '11
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
This is exactly my worry. I thought that Obama had taught us that a smart president with no experience leading an organization larger than a Congressional staff makes for a disastrous executive.
Troy, do you have any insight into his skills as a boss? The fact that he couldn't keep a campaign staff together (and apparently still calls most of the shots himself) doesn't bode well for a position that requires delegation and management as much as intellect.
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Here's one old and unfavorable story of Newt as a boss. Christina Jeffrey has not come up in Newt attacks probably because it is forgotten. It was the first attack on him when he became speaker though.
I slightly lean towards Newt too, but he definitely has that far overused cliche "baggage."
Jun '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Mendel
...
This is exactly my worry. I thought that Obama had taught us that a smart president with no experience leading an organization larger than a Congressional staff makes for a disastrous executive.
Troy, do you have any insight into his skills as a boss? The fact that he couldn't keep a campaign staff together (and apparently still calls most of the shots himself) doesn't bode well for a position that requires delegation and management as much as intellect.
Lincoln was a good executive with no prior executive experience.
Personally, I think executive experience is important but it's not required -- and less so depending on the task put before the president.
Newt's task will be similar to Lincoln's -- to reverse the gains of the Democratic Party, in the south (temporary renamed the Confederacy) and in the north (main leader was McClellan).
Dec '11
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Newt masterminded the "Republican Revolution" of 1994, crafted the Contract With America, forced Bill Clinton to acede to welfare reform, presided over several years of balanced budgets and kept Clinton from further gutting our military budget.
Those are tangible results. All the other stuff about his temperament is mere noise.
The real business of governance in this country happens in the Congress. No other candidate has anything near Newt Gingrich's mastery of the legislative process.
Mar '11
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Larry Koler
Personally, I think executive experience is important but it's not required -- and less so depending on the task put before the president.
I agree that executive experience may not be a prerequisite, but without executive skills, even the smartest politician can make hash of a presidency. Remember how much time was wasted under Clinton, a notoriously disorganized president, on fixing messes caused by his administration?
Jun '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Troy, why does no one explain the context of the times in terms of Newt being attacked so viciously by the Dems and the media. What blows my mind is to hear all these damaging remarks by leftists of the time being bandied about now by conservatives and Republicans. Don't they even know where most of this stuff comes from? Especially the bitterly angry talk of him being unbalanced and unstable. (Soviets loved that characterization when dealing with their own dissidents)
Imagine a fair-minded conservative or center-right type telling the story of Sarah Palin right now and failing to mention the treatment she received and continues to receive by the leftists in the country.
Newt's treatment was the politics of personal destruction. But, let's make it clear what kind it was: it's the Soviet influenced kind: Whitaker Chambers was the first to get this treatment. Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy were next (Robert Kennedy was exempted because he was a Democrat -- pure and simple), then Nixon again, then Reagan, then Dan Quayle, then Newt and recently Bush 43, and Palin. (Did I leave anyone out?)
Jun '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Mendel
Larry Koler
Personally, I think executive experience is important but it's not required -- and less so depending on the task put before the president.
I agree that executive experience may not be a prerequisite, but without executive skills, even the smartest politician can make hash of a presidency. Remember how much time was wasted under Clinton, a notoriously disorganized president, on fixing messes caused by his administration? · Dec 12 at 10:26pm
Agreed -- good stipulation. But, it's often hard to exactly predict what executive skills a person will have without a prior record or them being given a probationary period. (Maybe our presidents should get 3 terms allowed: 2 years, 4 years and 4 years.)
I think Newt has had a lot more executive experience than Lincoln did.
Aug '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Conservatives have demonstrated a remarkable and generous resolve to rally behind anyone but Romney. They have set their faces like flint against Mitt and worked hard to come to terms with Newt. They have ceded major ground, they have forgiven much, and they are resolved to play this wild card.
It seems to me all they really get in return is someone who will talk tough to Obama and his base.
Newt is a Washington insider, a shameless K Street money snuffleupagus and the last of the accidental book tour candidates. But none of that matters anymore.
There is no one left to turn to.
I cannot conceive of a similar generosity toward Newt residing in the hearts and minds of centrists, independents, and the Obama-forsaken white working class among the general electorate.
The base is cornered and Newt is their way out. But there is no corresponding motivation to be found among the center of the electorate. I understand this motive, but I do not share it. I see no reason to expect the middle to do either.
This white-ish raiment the base has clothed Newt in will not cover him come the general election.
Edited on Dec 12, 2011 at 11:19pmOct '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Troy, I think you overestimate Newt’s ability to govern effectively. His decision to force the impeachment of Bill Clinton was a disaster for Republicans and undermined all of the positive effects of the 1994 “revolution”.
A good executive is a good listener. Newt, like Obama is not a good listener. Both he and President Obama have raised self confidence to the level of arrogance.
My state’s primary is not until June, and the nominee may decided by then. If Newt is the nominee, I will support him. However the current infatuation with him among Conservatives reminds me of the three monkey statue: see no evil, speak no evil and hear no evil. This coming campaign will be the most personal and divisive of our lifetime. Newt could “punish” Obama for his radical policies to the applause of Conservatives, but his selection will allow the Democrats to make the case to Independents that the choice is between him and Obama, not the failure of Obama’s record. Is Newt the best candidate to force the Independents to focus on Obama’s record? I’m not sure. If not, we’re looking at a two-term Obama presidency.
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Scott, I cannot "like" your comment emphatically enough.
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Larry Koler:
Newt's treatment was the politics of personal destruction. But, let's make it clear what kind it was: it's the Soviet influenced kind: Whitaker Chambers was the first to get this treatment. Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy were next (Robert Kennedy was exempted because he was a Democrat -- pure and simple), then Nixon again, then Reagan, then Dan Quayle, then Newt and recently Bush 43, and Palin. (Did I leave anyone out?) · Dec 12 at 10:26pm
Whao there, Larry.
I despise and deplore the politics of personal destruction, and the grotesque hypocrisy and bias of the left when it comes to the treatment of conservatives.
But being targeted by the left doesn't mean you deserve the devotion of the right.
It wasn't a media campaign of lies and distortions that made Newt take the positions he's taken on healthcare reform and global warming. They didn't cause his affair with a staffer. They didn't create his sophistical habit of mind. They didn't make up the story of the "consulting fees" from Freddie Mac.
By all that and much more, Newt has brought the disaffection of the right on himself.
Edited on Dec 13, 2011 at 4:47amMay '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Here's a passage from that Avik Troy article at NRO Scott mentioned:
Larry, it seems to me you're doing something similar here. When conservatives raise concerns about Newt and objections to the idea of his being our nominee, you charge them with falling in with Soviet style politics of personal destruction.
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
katievs
Scott, I cannot "like" your comment emphatically enough. · Dec 13 at 3:42am
Thanks and right back at ya, katievs. This morning I stuck in links if you're interested.
Sep '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Squishy Blue RINO:
It seems to me all they really get in return is someone who will talk tough to Obama and his base.
I say thats exactly what is needed, although your charaterization diminishes the import. I would say, rather than talking tough, is making the argument America needs to have, and now is the time. No Romney or Huntsman or even Perry can make this argument. I've come to believe Gingrich can and will. It is important because we must vanquish these leftist tropes once and for all, and now is the time. This election is also about the media itself, and if they get a pass, Obama wins.
But if you think that all we have to do is get Obama out of office and get someone a bit more sane and a bit more competent with a different approach, then Romney is quite fine.
I am also attracted to Gingrich in a way I didn't expect. I like that hes already vilified and is a happy warrior. I trust something about Gingrich, he doesn't need to be liked.
So it really comes down to ones understanding of the situation we find ourselves in.
Sep '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Newt appears to be disliked by the Washington establishment that should win him the Republican nomination and give him a leg up in the general election.
May '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Franco
I would say, rather than talking tough, is making the argument America needs to have, and now is the time. No Romney or Huntsman or even Perry can make this argument. I've come to believe Gingrich can and will.
Franco, please square this contention with this:
Scott Reusser: Yuval Levin's most damning criticism of Newt is more policy-based. He considers Newt's Medicare reform to be timid at best, feckless at worst -- as does Pete Wehner, the WSJ, and now Avik Roy at NRO. Romney's proposal, on the other hand, is entirely Ryan-compatible -- as Ryan himself says.
This is significant, no? I mean, if the great opportunity presented by this "moment", as Prof. Rahe has said, is to propose, defend, and create a mandate for real, substantive change to the entitlement state, of which Medicare is the most dysfunctional element, then we needn't speculate anymore: Newt's wasting the moment.
Dec '11
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
My general thought on newt is that perhaps we have finally found a place in time where we have a newt shaped hole to put newt. A president totally in love with the future is a welcome change to a country who is desperately looking for a future that doesnt look small and unpleasant. Oh and he actually made government smaller, kind of important that.
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Mendel
Larry Koler
Personally, I think executive experience is important but it's not required -- and less so depending on the task put before the president.
I agree that executive experience may not be a prerequisite, but without executive skills, even the smartest politician can make hash of a presidency. Remember how much time was wasted under Clinton, a notoriously disorganized president, on fixing messes caused by his administration? · Dec 12 at 10:26pm
And look at Obama. Larry Summers' business about being "home alone" is telling.
Sep '10
Re: A Few More Thoughts on Newt
Scott Reusser
Franco
I would say, rather than talking tough, is making the argument America needs to have, and now is the time. No Romney or Huntsman or even Perry can make this argument. I've come to believe Gingrich can and will.
Franco, please square this contention with this:
Scott Reusser: Yuval Levin's most damning criticism of Newt is more policy-based. He considers Newt's Medicare reform to be timid at best, feckless at worst -- as does Pete Wehner, the WSJ, and now Avik Roy at NRO. Romney's proposal, on the other hand, is entirely Ryan-compatible -- as Ryan himself says.
This is significant, no? I mean, if the great opportunity presented by this "moment", as Prof. Rahe has said, is to propose, defend, and create a mandate for real, substantive change to the entitlement state, of which Medicare is the most dysfunctional element, then we needn't speculate anymore: Newt's wasting the moment.
I'm talking about very general ideas and direction, not specific proposals and what may or may not be wrong about them. I dont expect any of these plans to end up like they started anyway.