Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Hi all, sorry I've been away for a while and may have missed the conversation if this point was already raised. But I'm a bit befuddled over the Fall of Newt.
First, let me say that I've never been much of a fan of Newt, though like most conservatives I grant that at a certain point in history he was the right man at the right time, and helped Americans rediscover their conservative roots.
Still, I'm aghast at how quickly conservatives have thrown him under the bus, and on what basis.
I was traveling at the time and saw the Meet the Press Interview. I was groggy and missed the specifics of the question, but got every word of Newt's reply. It resonated with the deepest conservative part of me. The sentiments he expressed go to the very heart of conservatism. Though I don't think of myself as a Libertarian I too am absolutely against anything that could be characterized as "Right Wing Social Engineering" and shudder when Conservatives become hyper-interventionist as if they were Progressives, only with a different agenda.
The key problem, as everyone here knows, and I discovered as the interview went on, is the context of this statement -- which effectively slanders the Ryan plan. Okay, I understand this was a serious tactical error, and it positions Newt badly vis-a-vis the current conservative main proposal for the optimal way forward. It probably reveals a serious failure of judgment by Newt, loyalty problems and so on.
But ... was he wrong? Does he have a point? Has he committed the unforgivable sin?
Those are rhetorical questions. Here, however, are a few I'd actually like answered, by people closer to the issue than me:
1. Am I right that -- removing it from the Ryan plan context -- Newt's reply consisted of unassailable bedrock Conservative values? If not, what was wrong with it (again, with no reference to the Ryan plan. I'm trying to establish whether it is the principle or its application that is so wrong here)
2. Now, assuming that I am right about the principles Newt invokes, is he right, or even plausibly right, that it is possible to apply the principles he invokes to the Ryan plan in this way? Is it, in a purely academic sense, a valid critique? Again, if not, where is he wrong? Is he wrong (I mean, other than tactically) to attempt what I believe he regards as a nuanced view of the plan?
3. Is the Ryan plan, either as a whole or piecewise, sacrosanct? Is criticizing the plan the unforgivable sin for conservative candidates? I know a partial answer, as I have seen a number of leading conservatives criticize this or that part of the plan, usually saying it does not go far enough. But can one say, "no, it is flawed in principle and something else altogether is needed" without being excommunicated?
4. Has Newt been given a fair chance to explain whatever nuances he claims for this position in a public forum, or has he been so ostracized that this would be impossible now?
All of this is somewhat academic for me, as I have no strong feelings one way or another about the old Lizard -- I'm just a bit astonished at the severity of the backlash here.
- Comment (31)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
You will wait and wait for an answer from the pundits. They are too busy repeating the over, over, over, get out now mantra (you'd think they were liberals it has so little content and so much high dudgeon).
I've talked about this before with Palin: they are scared to to death that Newt will either get or affect the Republican nomination. They all see him as being unelectable and don't have sufficient mental discipline to concoct simple sentences about the two separate notions, debatable ideas vs. electability. There is an air of desperation here.
Regarding Paul Ryan, I think we Newt supporters should refer to him as Bristol Ryan. He's so defenseless and young and just a school child -- a non-combatant if you want to put the Michael Corleone spin on it -- that everyone needs to defend the poor guy. He's a darling of the right -- and I love him, too. But, he's not a 12 yr. old girl for crying out loud.
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
As reported on the Blaze.com:
In a conference call with conservative bloggers...One Washington Times reporter asked Gingrich about reports that he’s changed his position on several issues, including Libya and cap & trade. In reply, Gingrich insisted he’s always opposed cap & trade “in its current form..."
In its current form?! What the heck does that mean? He doesn't oppose cap & trade outright, in total? He believes that carbon dioxide generated by human beings is causing climate change? Are you kidding me?
Jan '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
The Ryan plan is not sancrosanct - except for people who last ran for elective office, let alone held one, 13 years ago, and who are answering questions from Democrat David Gregory on "Meet the Press."
In the same contemptuous manner that Gingrich dismissed Gregory's totally expected racism charge about his "food stamp president" comment, he should have immediately turned the tables on his Democrat shill-interrogator and mocked the total lack of a deficit reduction plan of any kind by the Democrats.
Newt's performance demonstrated that he knows how to defend himself, but not his team. That's why people like me are PO-ed at him.
Don't attack your fellow Republicans who are battling in the arena.
Attack Democrats, 24/7/365.
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Freesmith: ...
Don't attack your fellow Republicans who are battling in the arena. ...
Have you heard about primaries? Primaries are where you battle it out in your own party first.
If Newt wants to put distance between his own ideas (and he's been thinking about this for a long time) and Bristol Ryan's plan then let's have it out. It's not like we have to worry about an actual vote until sometime in 2013 anyway.
Nov '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Interesting so far. I take it that Freesmith would say that whether Newt's statement is defensible or not the essence of his fall is that he violated Reagan's dictum. Fair enough. Larry appears to be of the view that Newt is right about his criticism of Ryan's plan. The consensus appears to be (except for the hardline Newt supporters) that he has lost his chance by now, regardless of how right or wrong he may have been. This covers Q's #2-#4, sorta.
Can anyone weight in on question #1? Am I wrong to say that he was ... in any case ... invoking the right principles to make comments about government policy and budget initiatives, even if one concedes that they do not apply to the Ryan plan.
Jan '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
The question is how you battle it out, isn't it, Larry? Obviously, you and I have a different take.
Do you want to vote for the candidate best able to attack the plans of other Republicans, or the one best able to attack the plans of Obama and the Democrats?
Attacking another Republican's plan on "Meet the Press" only impresses Democrats. As you may have noticed in David Gregory's reaction, they eat it up. Newt's words are already being focus-group-tested for Democrat TV ads - against Republicans. If that's your idea of what Republican primaries are for, don't complain when you lose the general election.
Newt would've been wiser to put all of his vaunted thinking to the test of an actual election at least once in the last 13 years, don't you think?
Edited on May 21, 2011 at 4:18pmJun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
As far as Newt is concerned he was there (and he was consequential) when the earth was cooling (late 1970s and early 1980s) and he defines the term bedrock.
About Ryan's plan my position is that Newt is right to think he can criticize Ryan's plan. Newt is a deep thinker and, if he has something to say with regard to Ryan then I will give him a hearing. BTW, when did Ryan's plan get invoked by Newt, anyway? Gregory just asked about ramming legislation through.
It all comes down to trust. I trust Newt. Others don't. I still want to hear the debates -- not the name calling and asking Newt to step down on his first day of the campaign.
It's really silly about Republicans -- they seem to have no gratitude at all. Palin gave McCain the only chance he ever had and Newt has a real track record that is -- as measured by actual accomplishments in office -- second only to Reagan's. No one else is in his league. I recognize the electability issue but I want a trustworthy and proven leader -- not some gleam in George Will's eye.
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Freesmith: ...
Do you want to vote for the candidate best able to attack the plans of other Republicans, or the one best able to attack the plans of Obama and the Democrats?
...
Newt would've been wiser to put all of his vaunted thinking to the test of an actual election at least once in the last 13 years, don't you think?
It is the nature of primaries that Madison and Jefferson so wanted in all elections -- that the elites battle each other rather than turn their guns against the common folk. We need to have them battle each other. Why is this only against Newt? Newt should be entitled to some protection too. But, this mild, this tepid little tempest in a tea pot is something that we should all come unglued on? What is going on here?
Regarding other election possibilities, the presidency is different. Newt really didn't have other options. I do wish that he would have run in 2008 -- it would have been beneficial. I suspect that he knew that after GWB it was going to be a Democrat anyway. I think Newt knows that he only has one chance. (But Mitt needed 2008.)
Edited on May 21, 2011 at 4:55pmFeb '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
My thought is, what wouldn't count as "right wing" social engineering? Isn't the only non-social engineering answer to abolish Medicare and SS immediately and to return the net-present-value of the funds that people have paid in over the course of their lives? Medicare and SS are examples social engineering. In any case where we are allowing SS and Medicare to continue to exist then we are engaging in some form of social engineering, but social engineering that has become the status-quo. I don't know if defending the status-quo counts as true conservatism.
Powerline has had some good posts on the Ryan Gingrich issue.
Edited on May 21, 2011 at 5:37pmJun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
I haven't seen the Meet the Press interview, but I did hear Newt on Rush's show on Thursday. Newt claimed the question he was responding to was about the way Obamacare was passed by a strict party-line vote, without Republican support and (more importantly) without majority support from the American people. He was asked if the Republicans won, should they implement the Ryan plan under similar circumstances (i.e. if the majority were opposed), and he said no, that would be right-wing social engineering.
His other criticism of the Ryan plan was that it entirely eliminates the current Medicare plan for people under 55. Newt seems to favor instead an opt-out provision, where people can choose between the current plan and a private alternative.
Jan '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Larry,
I supported Newt's entry into the race, way back all of one week ago. I looked forward to his articulate attack on the current administration, an attack loaded with contempt, reason and ridicule directed at Obama; and to a spirited, positive statement of all things conservative. I'm still ready to support such a campaign, from Newt or anyone else able to mount it.
What I am most definitely NOT interested in are a series of debates in which each GOP candidate tries to score points against another. There will be a time for that - when only two are left standing, exactly as Hillary and Obama went at each other in the final primaries of 2008.
Until then I am auditioning my preferred candidate against Obama. Assessing the skills that each candidate brings to that task is the primary (pun intended) part of this initial process.
Therefore, when asked by a Democrat (Gregory, Stephanopoulus, Couric, etc.) about another Republican, a strong candidate will show his strength by the speed and seamlessness with which he pivots from the merits of the Republican into a full-bore denunciation of the present administration.
No "third way" for me.
Nov '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Joseph, if you're right and Newt can convincingly argue that his comments were directed at a hypothetical extension of the process of Obamacare to the Ryan plan, perhaps there is some weight to this and Newt could still be be in the race. If this is the case, I wonder why it hasn't managed to clear smart conservatives' horizon of consciousness?
Conor, thanks for weighing in on #1, though maybe you still have #2 in mind. When I posed the question I hadn't thought this was only about opposing "right wing (or other) social engineering", but perhaps that in itself is a worthy concept to open up.
What, among those things Conservatives offer, might qualify as "engineering"? Military conscription? Bringing back official prayers in schools? A law against flag burning? Anti-vice crime laws? Anti-union legislation? Subsidies for Institutes supporting Right Wing, instead of Left Wing, causes?
Ought one distinguish between coercion and persuasion in matters of "engineering"? I think of the story of the cad who laughs when an old lady falls in the mud. A conservative says "Tch. You shouldn't do that." A Liberal says "Hey! You can't do that!!!"
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Here's the transcript:
MR. GREGORY: Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors...
REP. GINGRICH: Right.
MR. GREGORY: ...some premium support and--so that they can go out and buy private insurance?
REP. GINGRICH: I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don't think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate...
MR. GREGORY: But not what Paul Ryan is suggesting, which is completely changing Medicare.
REP. GINGRICH: I, I think that, I think, I think that that is too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the--I don't want to--I'm against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
I would add that I agree with Ann Coulter that the social issues are more popular than the fiscal issues. The idea that the way to beat Obama is to jettison the social issues and run on entitlement reform instead is delusional. The majority of the public now call themselves pro-life, traditional marriage wins every time it's on the ballot even here in California, while the public clearly opposes major changes to Medicare and Social Security.
Entitlement reform is necessary, but to make it politically palatable I think Newt is right, it needs to be an "opt-it" model where people voluntarily migrate to any new voucher system.
Jun '10
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
What still interests me the most here is: what is going on that every pundit takes this simple little discussion between Newt and Gregory and pretends as though the world has fallen in on Newt? This is pathetic, unseemly and disengenuous. Too many pundits don't discuss what was said and just nod affirmatively that Newt has really blown it. This is a high tech lynching.
Feb '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
Craigen-
I think the distinction between coercion and persuasion is a key element of conservatism and we want to avoid being coercive as much as possible. A couple of thoughts:
A coercion/persuasion post would be good, unfortunately I am being coerced to get to bed by my wife and it will have to wait for later.
Mar '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
R: It's pretty simple - the Tea Party.
All is explained on the latest Podcast :-)
Mar '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
The problem I have with Newt is a more fundamental one: He is not actually a conservative at all.
A conservative believes that people should be trusted to make their own decisions.
Newt believes that what the people *actually* need is a smarter government, "run like a corporation", and with him in charge. He is nothing more or less than another Philosopher King, temperamentally more in sync with Barack Obama than with Reagan.
Every time he talks and Republicans swoon, I feel ill. I cannot believe that so many people fall for his "I am smarter, and have been thinking about this longer, so I have the best government solutions" shtick. He does it about everything. Ultimately, he believes in himself too much to believe that the most important function of government is to leave people alone as much as possible.
Newt is a RINO.
Mar '11
Re: Newt, Right in Principle But Wrong on Ryan Plan?
As for the Ryan plan, and Republican responses to it:
As far as I am concerned, the plan is sacrosanct UNLESS the speaker at the same time puts forward an alternative that accomplishes at least as much (both fiscally and philosophically).
Anyone else who tries to split the difference is a squish, and rightly deserving of condemnation.
I won't support any candidate for President who does not campaign on a specific plan.