Vagaries of Newtocracy
This article by Katrina Trinko over at NRO on Newt Gingrich's policy clunkers is interesting.
Some of the comments called Trinko a Romney shill for making a list of reasons why Newt's policies over the years might give conservatives pause. But I don't see why writing an article like this makes someone a shill, or why, even if the writer were a shill, the information reported would be useless.
Not all of the items on the list bug me, but some do -- plenty. What was Newt thinking when he supported a prototype of the Fairness Doctrine? Why did he hafta finally cave on TARP when he came so close to not caving? And what kind of guy apparently refers to the Ryan plan "right-wing social engineering" when he himself has a history of keeping all sorts of crazy targeted tax credits as pets?
What do you think?
- Comment (51)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Dec '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I think the difference between Newt having a bad idea and others having one is that he can explain why he had it, how he arrived at it, the process that changed his mind, and what the newer, better idea is. He doesn't cling to stupid ideas after he believes they are stupid just to avoid the charge of another flip flop. He studies, arrives at a conclusion, and if further evidence warrants a change of mind or heart he undergoes the change. Given the opportunity to explain each item on the list, I think Newt would at least make us understand where he was at with those things and possibly even create some level of agreement. It is a skill set he holds singularly among our candidates.
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I'm more concerned by Gene Healy's treatment of Newt's ideas in the Washington Examiner:
Oh, and this morning we learn that his Freddie Mac payments are more like $1.6 million instead of the already embarrassing $300K that was reported.
Edited on Nov 16, 2011 at 7:09amDec '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Mollie, it sounds to me like Newt's baggage is starting to vibrate while going through security. That will be embarrassing to all when it is opened.
May '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
If there was ever a case to made for the robust exposure and review of a candidate's past behavior and positions it was made via the election of the unexamined Comrade Obama.
May '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I actually agree with the positions on TARP, "partial amnesty" (which in effect means recognizing that after you seal the border, we might as well recognize that in the real world you are not going to take a bus around the country and deport 10 million people) and Medicare Part D.
But since Newt is just the latest intellectually unconsidered and unresearched True Red ABR model following on in Bachmann's footsteps, let everyone see all the apostasies so people can make informed decisions.
Nov '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
As always an excellent piece by NRO, Ms. Trinko is to be congratulated. Now if she would do the exact same thing to Mitt Romney, we could compare the two.
Newt has definitely been one of the more frustrating conservatives to like; one reason is that he reminds me that one of the Democrats' worst ideas started off as a Republican (even conservative) idea. I remember when cap and trade was first proposed as a brilliant free market solution that would allow some companies to pollute more because others would pollute less; it later devolved into a socialistic tax scheme. Oops!
Newt makes mistakes, but remember, Ronald Reagan was heavily criticized by conservatives throughout his Presidency. Talking to the editors of Human Events, he ruefully said, “I am reading you more but enjoying it less.” I personally remember hearing Paul Harvey criticize Ronald Reagan for not being conservative enough (OUCH, that hurts!).
The only perfect conservatives are those who have never held office. Newt's as conservative as we can hope for in the next election, and would make a fine President.
Edited on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:03amJun '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Newt has explained several times that the "right wing social engineering" comment referred to the process of passing entitlement reform rather than the merits of the Ryan Plan. The question as he understood it was "if the GOP controlled Congress and the Presidency, but the polls showed the public opposed entitlement reform, should they pass it anyway like Obama did with Obamacare?" And he said no, passing a plan opposed by the public is social engineering.
Aug '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I agree with you on the amnesty and Medicare Part D bit. To me those fall under the category of making the best of the awful mess we already have.
I'm just never going to agree with TARP, though. Because I don't think TARP was making the best of the awful mess we already had. Painful as it would have been, I think making the best of that awful mess would have meant insulating people less from the fact that it... was such an awful mess. (But then, I've always preferred my pain intense but shorter rather than milder but more lingering.)
Aug '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I know, I know... Which is why I cleverly used the word "apparently".
But golly, social engineering is still social engineering when the public supports it, and lack of public support isn't the same thing as social engineering, either.
Plus, if you can call any less-than-popular rolling back of the social engineering we already have "social engineering", how do we ever get away from social engineering? People like the benefits they've gotten used to, and the necessary dismantling isn't always going to be popular.
Sure, let's make reform as palatable as possible, but there are limits.
Apr '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Newt is flawed, as is every other candidate. The only question we need concern ourselves with is "who can stomp Obama?" I don't yet know the answer to that question.
Mar '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
True Story - When Newt Gingrich was born, the Dr slapped him on the bottom and Newt yelled out "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States!"
OK, not a true story but it almost sounds like it could be right?
It seems to me that Newt has been positioning himself for the Presidency for decades. I don't mean to suggest that every lousy decision was an act of genius but I do believe sitting with Pelosi and knocking Ryan were acts undertaken with an eye toward the general election. I also believe Newt the historian aspires not only to the Presidency but to Mount Rushmore. In other words, Newt has done what he has needed to do to stay relevant and position himself for the Presidency. I believe he intends to be transformatively conservative in the White House in the hopes of being remembered as a great President in 2112 and 2212.
(BTW, I don't want to commit to saying he will be or can be transformatively conservative... only that he intends to be.)
Mar '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I feel better about Newt vs Romney after reading a great piece at the American Spectator -- comparing Newt to Churchill. Unlikely, I know, but the comparison is actually pretty good.
Churchill was a historian, and made many mistakes. He had many flaws, but was the right man for the time he became PM.
So, today, I am leaning towards Newt - at least he would most likely return the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office, and appreciate the value of the desk.
Edited on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:47amNov '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Plus, if you can call any less-than-popular rolling back of the social engineering we already have "social engineering", how do we ever get away from social engineering?
Your comment made me think about Newt's biggest gripe: ALL social engineering is bad. Isn't that what he was saying? Whether or not you agree with him that one thing or another fits the definition of "social engineering," he was certainly taking a stand against "social engineering."
My only quibble would be that, ideologically, "right wing social engineering" is a bit of an oxymoron (which would make "left wing social engineering" a bit of a redundancy). But the point remains: social engineering is wrong, whether done by the left or the right.
Edited on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:59amApr '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
I'm beginning to think I'll just stay home on election day. Conservatives are doing an excellent job of destroying each and every one of our candidates. The MSM doesn't need to print a word. Our pundits are doing their dirty work for them. At the end of the day, the only one left standing will be Romney and he'll limit government and spending about as much as Bush did. I'm disgusted.
Apr '11
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
David Williamson: I feel better about Newt vs Romney after reading a great piece at the American Spectator -- comparing Newt to Churchill. Unlikely, I know, but the comparison is actually pretty good.
Churchill was a historian, and made many mistakes. He had many flaws, but was the right man for the time he became PM.
So, today, I am leaning towards Newt - at least he would most likely return the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office, and appreciate the value of the desk. ·
Churchill's mistakes included essentially every serious bit of socialism to transform the UK in the 20th century. We got it done by the 50s,barring discrimination law, which Churchill obviously wouldn't have supported, albeit for the wrong reasons (the right reasons are a love for the free market, the wrong reasons include an excessive degree of comfort with gassing kurds) and Europe, which he supported.
You know how we're the terrible example that shows America where not to go? Most of that comes from Lloyd George, with Churchill at his side. After WWI, there is a break in the horror while Churchill is out of office. Big government returns when he becomes PM.
Jun '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
A country this vast and great, with a 100 million Republicans, and these are our choices. Color me numb.
Aug '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Doug Lee
But the point remains: social engineering is wrong, whether done by the left or the right.
Definitely agree. But when it's so easy to use the words "social engineering" to describe a plan attempting to wean us off social engineering, we've got a problem, no?
May '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
I agree with you on the amnesty and Medicare Part D bit ........
I'm just never going to agree with TARP, though. Because I don't think TARP was making the best of the awful mess we already had. Painful as it would have been, I think making the best of that awful mess would have meant insulating people less from the fact that it... was such an awful mess......
MFR, I also agreed with Newt's rationale for supporting TARP 1 as it was presented in September 2008 (not the capital injections, TARP 2 or the auto bailouts)- it was reluctant and caused by a horror over possible alternatives, the same reason that Ricichet's resident brilliant economist also reluctantly supported TARP 1- at the time, and in that context.
I wish we'd never heard the acronym TARP- but in 2008, it was not unconservative of Paul Ryan or Newt buy in. It is easy today to look back and disapprove, and at the time Bachmann's mode of opposition was disgraceful.
Sep '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
He certainly does offer those explanations. But do you believe them, or is he simply saying what he needs to say now to make what he said yesterday go away?
Aug '10
Re: Vagaries of Newtocracy
You mean just the primaries, right? I hope?
Why is it destructive to take a good, hard look at our candidates' potential weaknesses? We need to know them. Because the other side will make a meal of them at every opportunity. That's how the game works.
I think there's truth to the idea that, because Bush had a conservative image, he wasn't held accountable enough for favoring conservative policies. We gave him a pass based on optics, and we shouldn't have. We're at least not going to have that trouble with Romney, right?
Plus, I think during Bush's time, the populace was more willing to give so-called "big government conservatism" a try. Not so much anymore.
Maybe we're doomed. But maybe we're not as doomed as you think.
Edited on Nov 16, 2011 at 11:39am