No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Nancy Pelosi said that she knows something and that Newt Gingrich will never be president. Gingrich called her out, saying put up or shut up, and now Pelsoi's spokesman says that she didn't really mean that she has any secret dirt. She just knows that Newt won't be president.
Pelosi's rhetoric put two sentences together (I know something) and (Newt won't be president), and then left it to the imagination of the audience to connect them with some cause - which she then had to admit that she didn't have.
I've been hearing a lot of that lately.
- It frequently takes the form of "All the people who know Newt well don't want him to be president." OK ... why? That's the part that rarely gets explained.
- Then I hear that Newt has a colossal ego. Well, so do a lot of successful people. Still waiting for the big problem.
- Then I hear that Newt can't focus. David Frum has an article today that takes a Gingrich memo from 2004 where Newt was advising the GOP, and Frum chides Gingrich for focusing on issues that (now years later) seem irrelevant. Fairly selective editing, of course (I'm sure the whole of Gingrich's agenda wasn't limited to this one memo), but so what? Newt addresses a lot of issues. His pattern is classic extroversion ... he provokes an issue, runs all sorts of solutions up a flagpole ... and then waits to see who salutes what. Newt isn't an introvert. (Neither am I - that's why I recognize the pattern.)
- Then I hear that his divorces will defeat him. OK, but Reagan was divorced, and as we've seen, pretty much everything that could be said about him has already been said.
- And so on ...
I fully recognize that Newt's detractors may have very specific reasons why Gingrich is a leadership disaster. But at the moment, I'm hearing a lot of assurances that he's a disaster, but very few specific reasons. What few reasons I've heard don't justify the certainty of the assurances. Like the kid who sees a naked emperor, I have a lot of people running with assurances, but I don't see the clothes.
Now I may actually vote for this guy. At the very shaky moment, he's probably my number one out of the four GOP candidates. Of course, any GOP candidate will be better than Obama. If the election was held tomorrow, I'd probably vote for Gingrich.
So, to my fellow Ricochet members ... I'd never tell anyone to shut up, but I'd appreciate a little put up. Why is this guy so bad? Specifically. I don't need to hear how others don't like him ... I already know that they don't. My question is whether their antipathy is justified. Many people are certain that Gingrich will be a disaster, and that he'll turn people off, especially the independents. Why? Is it just because that's the Narrative? Has Clinton and the media tarred him so badly, fairly or unfairly, from the 1990s that he can't get rid of the feathers? Has the book been closed, even if he's not the same Newt?
It's not just a political task. In philosophy, the question is usually not what you know, but how do you know it? What's the basis for the assurance that he'll be a disaster? Or is it just an assurance that gets passed along, and its certainty comes from the frequency of its repetition rather than the quality of its reason?
If there are good reasons not to vote for this guy - tell me now.
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Mar '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Here's a link to an interview Tom Delay gave of his time as whip while Gingrich was speaker. It might be the "put up" you are looking for.
Jul '10
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
After it was reported in the NYT and WaPo (albeit at the time buried on pages 23 and 5) that after an exhaustive investigation the IRS completely exonerated Newt, and then repeated just recently, where does Mitt think he's going with this -- other than a quick stab in the back just before the FL primary? And if Mitt should win the FL primary and the truth of the matter is reported on a much wider scale, what will the public think of him then? Will he keep these tactics up until he wins the nomination? Very bad form on his part.
Jul '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Stuart Creque
DocJay: He's no Bob Dole.
And Bob Dole himself is warning against Newt:
Not only is this a very weak hit against Newt, but coming from someone who ran one of the weakest Presidential campaigns ever, it's almost an endorsement of Newt.
I suggest that what we are seeing is a whole troop of people who've been waiting fifteen or twenty or even thirty years to take revenge on Newt for personal slights. · 22 minutes ago
I'd like to say that I knew about Dole's statement but I actually picked the most boring man ever to run for office.
You are correct about Newt's transgressions haunting him now.
Dec '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Thanks for this. Tom Coburn is someone to be taken seriously, unlike Ann Coulter or Jen Rubin.
Tom Coburn? Senator "Trillion-dollar-tax-hike" Coburn?
Dec '10
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
And to prove my point: Tom DeLay is a textbook example of someone who made the wrong people mad, mad enough to expend years of their lives looking for ways to take him down. Why would anyone be surprised that people are doing the same to Newt? Why would anyone expect Romney or Santorum to be somehow immune from such attacks?
Nov '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Nobody's Perfect: Thanks for this. Tom Coburn is someone to be taken seriously, unlike Ann Coulter or Jen Rubin.
Tom Coburn? Senator "Trillion-dollar-tax-hike" Coburn? · 4 minutes ago
Coburn has a long record of being a conservative. Is he a member of the Tea Party? No.
Apr '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Embittered Redleg: Jim Geraghty.gave specifics on this today, in fact. He has a blog post up that quotes extensively from Coburn's book.
And because I know it's coming, Geraghty is not in the tank for Romney. · 20 hours ago
Interesting. As far as that excerpt goes --- I suppose I agree with Coburn and not Newt on principle, on the right outcome of the vote. But Coburn seems as much irked by Newt's style as by the policy; and for President of the United States, I 100% want someone with that style in charge.
Jul '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Stuart Creque
And to prove my point: Tom DeLay is a textbook example of someone who made the wrong people mad, mad enough to expend years of their lives looking for ways to take him down. Why would anyone be surprised that people are doing the same to Newt? Why would anyone expect Romney or Santorum to be somehow immune from such attacks? · 50 minutes ago
The last thing I would ever want is myself as an enemy. Alternatively,to quote Pogo
May '10
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Gingrich on the sofa with Pelosi.
He'll chase any half-a$$ed idea as long as it aggrandizes him.
I'm concerned about an October surprise, and an October newtular explosion (given his poor impulse control).
OTOH, given that we're facing the metaphorical equivalent of Okinawa in this electoral campaign, there's a lot to be said for picking the Ka-bar wielding Newt to go over the top with at h-hour, rather than REMF Romney who we're a lot more comfortable leaving our wives and daughters at home with while we do battle with the Left.
So do we stake everything on one throw (Newt) or stick with something safer (Mitt)?
D@mned if I know, but at least it will probably be over by the time the primaries get to my beloved kakistocractic Peoples Republic of Illinois.
Dec '10
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
My "put up"? My eighty-one-year old mother. Who always votes Republican. Told me the other day she just won't vote if it's Newt. She sees what she sees (from the Washington Post) and won't-vote-for-Newt. Nor will her friends. It's a big, big problem, people.
Nov '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
I think there are a lot of people who just don't like Newt. I'm not talking about politicians and such with an axe to grind, but just average, generally disinterested folks. His personality just rubs them wrong way.
For instance, I showed my wife the video where Newt made a joke about Obama at Disney World with Mickey Mouse and Goofy. She's a big Disney fan, and I thought she'd appreciate it. Before he said ten words, long before the joke was set up, she said something to the effect of, "He's a jerk." She's not into politics enough to have an opinion of him one way or the other -- it was pure gut reaction. Needless to say, she didn't laugh at the joke.
It really made me worry about Newt's chances against Obama.
Jan '12
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Well, some "put up":
Clearly a self-aggrandizing narcissist
Fannie Mae "historian"
Was all in on the global warming "problem" until he decided to run for president
Serial adulterer that left two wives in suspect circumstances demonstrating a lack of character (character matters)
Generally disliked by people that have worked with him closely in the past - now you may say that these are just republican establishment people and they didn't like him "rocking the boat" but how can this not raise some serious red flags about his ability to lead?
Nov '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Big Green: Well, some "put up":
Clearly a self-aggrandizing narcissist
In the same vein, Romney is "clearly a robotic plutocrat". Come on, people.
Jan '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Of all the people who don't want Newt to be the Republican nominee, the best, the very best, is Bob Dole. The only thing he could have given Romney to top that would be AIDS.
Dole, the It's My Turn non-candidate, looked as out of place as a presidential candidate as Helen Thomas would in tights and a tutu - the impossible dream - the Dole standard for candidates.
I wonder how much that Dole endorsement cost the Gingrich campaign.
Apr '11
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Aaron Miller: Elliot Abrams had this to say about Newt's public rhetoric while serving in Congress under President Reagan.
I'd like to hear a counter-argument. More than anything, this relates to
Newt was right about Russia: Reagan could have been tougher, but was instead led to the center, and the decade-long cold war needlessly continued.
Newt was right about the surge in Iraq: Bush should have left once victory was declared; instead the DNC used the Iraq surge (what they called "Bush's war") more than anything else to demonize GW Bush.
Newt was right about the Ryan plan not doing enough, having too many concessions.
Newt is more conservative (and more politically astute) on all three of these issues than were the ones who supported them.
Jan '12
Re: No need to shut up, but can someone put up?
Mothership - turn on your sarcasm detector...come on now