A Refreshing Candor
A few days ago, I was in town long enough to take my Dad to a doctor's appointment. You may recall my disclosure a couple of weeks ago regarding Dad's diagnosis of Alzheimer's. We sat in the waiting room watching the people go by while Dad maintained a running stream of commentary about the things and people he saw. His hearing, made bad by a grenade that detonated too close to him while he was in the Army, is much worse now. Consequently he talks louder without realizing it, making his observations known to everyone around him including the object of his occasional barbs. I finally helped him understand that he was unwittingly broadcasting his remarks for general consumption, at which point he said, "So you want me to shut up." At about the time he agreed to put a cork in it, Murphy's Law arranged for a spectacularly outrageous example of human ostentatiousness to parade by. This lady, tall and gaunt, wore pants so tight they appeared to have been sewn onto her. She wavered precariously with each step atop nosebleed-inducing high heels. She sported a canary yellow sweater and a large, hot pink purse that was so bright it must have been freshly recharged. On her head she wore a leopard print hat right out of the Moammar Gadhafi Designer Collection. Dad watched in silence as she strutted by, while I waited both with dread and anticipation for his next comment. When she was about 30 feet from us, he leaned over and said, "Can I say what I think yet?" Perfect response, I thought,..and the chuckles of the people around us seemed to support that conclusion. In fact, I think it would have been a breath of fresh air if he had given voice to the things we were all thinking at the moment.
Candor, spoken effectively, is the antidote to the euphemistic pablum we've come to expect from the political class. It is an important reason, in my mind at least, for the rise of Newt Gingrich's standing the polls. Like or dislike him, watching him at work in debates is like living vicariously through your favorite sports team as they clobber a rival. He says the things we on the right think, which is itself a remarkable change of pace from Republican politicians who seem ashamed of their supporters' values. As the American Spectator's Ross Kaminsky pointed out yesterday, both Gingrich and Romney have taken left turns in the past. Gingrich embraced the individual mandate and occupied a couch with Nancy Pelosi, while Romney gave us the framework for Obamacare. And while it's true that at least Gingrich recognized his mistakes while Romney stubbornly refused to do so, neither one of them strikes me as a reliably conservative 100 percent of the time. But unless Professor Rahe can convince a few prospects to embrace the imperatives of real public service, these are our choices.
Interestingly, Dick Morris breaks the question down thus:
Is your chief priority in this thing turning the economy around and bringing us back to a really good, healthy long-term posture of economic growth? Or is your priority undoing the left-wing radical social-engineering agenda of the Obama presidency?
I don't know that it's an either/or proposition, to be honest, but I'll tell you one thing that I find compelling about Gingrich at this point: He is consistently making a compelling case for limited government in a way that is both unassailable and infuriating to the left. He would not only obliterate Obama in any debate, but as President he would do something we haven't seen a Republican do in a very long time. He would advance a conservative agenda effectively and defend his administration from consistent mischaracterizations on the part of leftists in government, academia, and the media. I don't know about you, but I've grown weary of watching Republicans cede half the playing field. Why not go on offense for a change? After watching in frustration as President Bush allowed his enemies to define him and his policies without mounting any real defense, the idea of having a president who is also an effective advocate is very, very tempting. Can we say what we think yet? Newt can.
- Comment (35)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Dec '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
wmartin
The level of wishful thinking and self-delusion has become pathological.
Barack Obama is very smart and will be well prepared.
So, what do you propose everyone should do (since we're all self delusional, as you put it)?
As for Obama being "very smart", I'll believe it when I see him make a single speech or even a two or three sentence comment without a teleprompter or notes that makes any damned sense.
For supposedly being the smartest guy in the room and the greatest orator to ever grace the Oval Office, the man is entirely unable to speak without having someone else formulate his words for him ahead of time.
When he talks "off prompter", he says things that make the toothless rednecks I live around seem entirely erudite.
With Newt, you never know what he's going to come up with idea wise, but whatever it is, you know that when he speaks about it (off the cuff or not), he's going to be clear enough that anyone who can speak english will understand the gist of his argument.
Re: A Refreshing Candor
WMartin, that's an interesting factor, and one to be taken very seriously. To what extent do you think Obama and his allies in the media would have a similar level of success with Ronmey? And would Romney be capable of fighting back?
Re: A Refreshing Candor
That's the central point to me as well. Both Gingrich and Romney leave something(s) to be desired. Given the hand we've been dealt, who can make the case, take the argument to the left and make THEM defend what they've done to the country, our children, and our grandchildren. Newt is the only person on the stage that can do that effectively and consistently, in my opinion.
Oct '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Dave Carter
I'm not aware of one. If a third party candidate surfaces, we learned from Ross Perot how that plays out. So unless another Republican gets an attack of conscience, we have the current field, or Obama. That's the hand we've been dealt. · Dec 10 at 4:26pm
The hand we have been dealt is indeed a poor one. The painfull dose of medicine is for conservatives to admit they have been asleep for too long.
If this were a game of blackjack, would split the cards and say, hit me again.
We are engaged in betting against the house here and what you may lose is not just your prized shirt.
Jul '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
I think you may want to revise this as it stands it sounds like a threat.
BTW, Did the Lincoln Douglas debates decide anything? How about the Nixon Kennedy debates?
Dave Carter:
As an example, I offer the following: · Dec 10 at 4:46pm
The crushing blow is just classic.
wmartin: every GOP candidate has a wealth of targets. As Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al. have pointed out: whoever the GOP trots out there as the candidate, he will be inundated with a wave of criticism from the $1B campaign and the Fifth Column in the press. It's naive to think otherwise.
At least Newt will fight back.
Edited on Dec 10, 2011 at 5:33pmMay '11
Re: A Refreshing Candor
I think wmartin has a valid point about Presidential debates.
Yes, the Republican debates have had a great impact. However, the debates between Republicans, for Republican consumption. The average Republican voter truly wants to hear what the candidates have to say. They are curious and involved.
When we get to the Presidential debates, minds are already made up. Now it is like rooting for your favorite sports team. There may be a winner and loser for each debate but votes will not be traded.
Undecideds are by definition not paying attention now nor will they pay attention to Presidential debates. They will go into the voting booth and make a selection based on the last campaign commercial they heard on the drive there.
May '11
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Actually Reid was elected because the unions came into town and poured masive time and effort into the campaign. Would a stronger candidate than Ms. Angle have helped? Of course but it was the unions that gave the election to Reid.
Oct '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Pilli: I think wmartin has a valid point about Presidential debates.
Yes, the Republican debates have had a great impact. However, the debates between Republicans, for Republican consumption. The average Republican voter truly wants to hear what the candidates have to say. They are curious and involved.
When we get to the Presidential debates, minds are already made up. Now it is like rooting for your favorite sports team. There may be a winner and loser for each debate but votes will not be traded.
Undecideds are by definition not paying attention now nor will they pay attention to Presidential debates. They will go into the voting booth and make a selection based on the last campaign commercial they heard on the drive there. · Dec 10 at 5:33pm
A very unpleasant truth. If people devoted the same convictions they do to sports to politics, the outcomes would be far more productive overall.
Jul '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Pilli
Actually Reid was elected because the unions came into town and poured masive time and effort into the campaign. Would a stronger candidate than Ms. Angle have helped? Of course but it was the unions that gave the election to Reid. · Dec 10 at 5:41pm
Reid was elected because SEIU counted the votes.
Apr '11
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Pilli
Actually Reid was elected because the unions came into town and poured masive time and effort into the campaign. Would a stronger candidate than Ms. Angle have helped? Of course but it was the unions that gave the election to Reid. · Dec 10 at 5:41pm
Sharron Angle only won 82% of voters who disapproved of Harry Reid. 12% of those who disapproved of Reid still voted for him. Yes, it was nice for him that unions helped, but it wouldn't have mattered with an acceptable Republican candidate.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-what-harry-reid-can-teach-gop-about-2012_598372.html
Apr '11
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Michael Tee
I think you may want to revise this as it stands it sounds like a threat.
BTW, Did the Lincoln Douglas debates decide anything? How about the Nixon Kennedy debates?
It has now been revised, and thank you.
Obviously, any Republican candidate is going to get hit hard next year. Some are more likely to survive it than others. Newt was one of the most unpopular people in the country in the 1990's for a reason (many are conveniently forgetting that).
Aug '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
I wonder if there isn't something almost Clontonian in Newt's misdemeanors. Billy's corruptions were so numerous and clear that people just accepted them as part of what he was and moved on. Because there is so much sludge to pour onto Newt, maybe it works to his benefit. With his straight as an arrow image, it might actually be easier to take Romney down as his mistakes would seem so much more disappointing.
May '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
Dave Carter
He could be an unmitigated disaster, as could Romney. But these seem to be the choices with which we are left. I sense in Newt something of a force that could arrest our descent into the collective abyss. In Romney, I sense only someone that could slow the descent. · Dec 10 at 4:06pm
Oops, sorry, forgot to mention I'm pretty sure Romney will be a disaster too, albeit in different ways than Gingrich. I would expect either to backstab the "conservative base" within 24 hours of being inaugurated (if not in their inaugural address).
I just can't picture myself working a phone bank or walking a precinct for Gingrich. I could suck it up and do it for Romney (like I did McCain).
Aug '11
Re: A Refreshing Candor
CoolHand
As for Obama being "very smart", I'll believe it when I see him make a single speech or even a two or three sentence comment without a teleprompter or notes that makes any damned sense.
For supposedly being the smartest guy in the room and the greatest orator to ever grace the Oval Office, the man is entirely unable to speak without having someone else formulate his words for him ahead of time.
When he talks "off prompter", he says things that make the toothless rednecks I live around seem entirely erudite.
Indeed. I've always thought Obama was a terrible speaker, and even worse when he had to speak off the cuff. I never saw this golden orator who so mesmerized the press. To me, he sounds like a smart-aleck student who never got the smack down he badly needed.
Nov '10
Re: A Refreshing Candor
I would love to see them meet in a debate, but I'd also love to see Obama run and Newt implement his contingency plan of allowing the White House to schedule his campaign stops, in that he would show up at every Obama campaign venue shortly after the President and rebut his speeches point by point. If Newt gets the nod this promises to be a campaign worth watching.