Eye of Newt

Adder’s fork

“The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution”

“It’s not a point of view libertarians would embrace, but I am more in the Alexander Hamilton-Teddy Roosevelt tradition of conservatism. [ie: Progressivism] I recognize that there are times when you need government to help spur private enterprise and economic development.”

“The opportunity society calls not for a laissez-faire society in which the economic world is a neutral jungle of purely random individual behavior, but for forceful government intervention on behalf of growth and opportunity.”

Ezra Klein did the heavy lifting on a post I’ve been planning for weeks; who am I not to give the man credit. As I …honor some of his research:

Newt:

previously supported a health-care plan with an individual mandate;

took $1.6 million from Freddie Mac;

carried on an extramarital affair with a House staffer 20-years his junior during the Clinton impeachment trial (they’re now married); [AND] tried to explain away said extramarital affair by saying, “There’s no question at times in my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate”;

was fined $300,000 by the House Ethics Committee for offering “incomplete, unreliable, and inaccurate” information during an investigation of a for-profit college course he developed while serving in Congress;

supported the 1989 Global Warming Prevention Act, which included a provision encouraging the U.N. to work to control population growth through, among other methods, family-planning services;

[During House Ethics Committee hearings] scribbled a note describing himself as an “Advocate of civilization, defender of civilization, teacher of the rules of civilization, arouser of those who form civilization, organizer of the pro-civilization activists, and leader ‘possibly’ of the civilizing forces”;

It’s not that all Newt’s ideas are bad; some are great. Permanent Lunar Colony and mining the Moon [but NOT in concert with the UN -- private enterprise can do it just fine][then move on to the asteroids, BTNIN], allowing children to work [not in sweat shops but to learn how to work]

I give the hypomania theory some credit.

called Paul Ryan’s budget “right-wing social engineering” and then, two days later, said, “The budget vote is one that I’m happy to say I would have voted for…So, let me say on the record: Any ad which quotes what I said Sunday is a falsehood because I have said publicly those words were inaccurate and unfortunate,”;

whaaa?!?

shifting intellectual and ideological repertoire of Toffler futurism, values conservatism, Six Sigma, big government conservatism, Total Quality Management, American exceptionalism, small government conservatism, and so on. “I want to shift the entire planet,” he told the Washington Post as a Republican backbencher in 1985. “And I’m doing it.”

Ok – that’s enough for now. I’ve got Stuff to Do.

Finish your assignment! »

–If voting really changed anything they’d have outlawed it by now.

33 Comments!

  1. Posted December 13, 2011 at 9:25 am |

    Newt’s one of those politicians that spent a lot of time in a warm room, sipping fine liquors and reading about the founders of this country. From that environment, he can’t fathom that the founders, after years of bloody conflict and the loss of their fortunes, did not trust government, knew of the foulness government created and drafted a document that they didn’t want anyone to screw around with. It’s in English, needs no interpretation and is a good thing for an honest government to follow.

    The damned thing is that there is no honesty left in government, or politicians. They’ll never concide they’ve followed the wrong path without the force of law or the force of man.

  2. Colonel Jerry USMC
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 9:46 am |

    Whell. At least he ain`t claimed to be The World`s Greatest Fighter Pilot.
    Cuz——-that would——–be——-ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. Justin Credible
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:04 am |

    And Ezra Klein only has the best interest of the GOP in his heart, right?

  4. DougM (jackassophobe)
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:05 am |

    I love listenin’ to Newt speak, but I’ve often winced at the words.
    I’m afraid you’re right, Claire, when it comes to Newt, we’re eft*.

    ^^ ColJ (2)
    In my experience, there sure are a lot of The World`s Greatest Fighter Pilots out there. I’m not criticizin’, mind you, just recognizin’ that it’s what fellers in your business gotta believe. Second-best involves a career-limiting drawback.

    * eft (n) an immature newt in the terrestrial phase

  5. Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:17 am |

    ^^ I think we are all immature newts in the terrestrial phase.

    Allowing someone to create a Career out of being a Politician is where we went wrong.

  6. mojo
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:36 am |

    Gah! A damned Hamiltonian!

  7. Claire: barbarian, etc
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:49 am |

    Ezra Klein’s motivations are irrelevant to my point. He just did some heavy lifting for me.

    Mojo — YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  8. Colonel Jerry USMC
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:02 am |

    Actually, there is only ONE!

  9. Barry
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:04 am |

    Careful now, you’re gonna PO some bloke named casca what hangs out over at RTRKOF’s place… he hates it when anyone disses his favorite big government R.

  10. Lance
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:09 am |

    Found this post at American Thinker this AM.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/forgiving_newt.html

    I just sent an email to the author, requesting that he come
    visit da Porch, & read what our Claire has posted ’bout Newt.
    I also severely disagreed with his premise ’bout people changing.
    Yanno, the old “leopard changing his spots” schtick.
    I pointed out that there is enough documented history ’bout
    Newt to accurately determine how much he’s ‘reely’ changed.

  11. Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:13 am |

    When I start thinking ‘simplistically’ about it, if a man can’t be trusted to Honor his Vows to the Woman he loves…..well, he sure as hell can’t be trusted to run My Country…..

    But that’s just me.

  12. Justin Credible
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:18 am |

    More heavy lifting by Klein.

    I’m not fanatical for any of the candidates – but I like all of them better than the incumbent. If you have a favorite candidate, that’s fine. Speak positively of that candidate.

    Beating on a candidate will not lure that candidates supporters to your banner.

  13. mojo
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:26 am |

    “Honey, who’s the best pilot you ever saw?”
    – The Right Stuff

  14. AZHolmes
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 11:43 am |

    I apologize ahead of time for this. Please show me where I’m wrong so I can get through the rest of the year. Thanks.

    This got me to thinking (oh, no). I believe that humanity will not prosper (or return to prosperity) until the truth about both “progressivism/socialism” and “conservatism/true capitalism” has been exposed. From that reference, I am coming to the conclusion that there are four possibilities for our (mankind’s) near future, and only one of them provides true and lasting prosperity.

    Possibility 0 (Denial):
    Progressivism continues to be tried with the media and pols proclaiming that any minute now it’ll start to work.
    Conservatism continues to be that nutty old theory that can’t work, so there’s really no need to even try it.
    Result: Living in misery until something changes.

    Possibility 1 (Negative re-enforcement):
    Progressivism continues to be tried with the media and pols proclaiming that any minute now it’ll start to work. It continues to fail and provides zero prosperity. Future government programs designed to stem the failures also fail miserably. Progressivism is exposed for the catastrophe that it is. The people call for changes to be made. Many theories are floated as the “new America”. They also fail.
    Conservatism remains on the back burner, for now.
    Result: Still living in misery while everything changes. Progressives desperatly fight the exposure of the truth.

    Possibility 2 (Positive re-enforcement):
    Conservatism is actually tried, and (naturally) works. Prosperity increases as the size and scope of government is reduced. Taxes decrease, and charity increases until it takes care of the truly needy.
    Progressivism moves to the back burner, though not dead yet. There are many movements launched to reinstate socialist policies and many are successful. The march toward progressivism re-starts.
    Result: Prosperity begins to return in coughs and spurts. This new-found prosperity is seen as a combination of luck (75%) and conservatism (25%). Since progressivism hasn’t been completely exposed, it lingers. Over time progressives will return, and claim that luck was 100% responsible for our recent prosperity. During this time, progressives sabotage everything they can to fix blame on conservative leaders. Nothing is spared. Terrorism is part of the plan. This is their last gasp.

    Possibility 3 (Enlightenment):
    Conservatism is actually tried, works, and is acknowledged. Prosperity increases as the size and scope of government is
    reduced. Taxes decrease, and charity thrives, and easily takes care of the truly needy, and many of the “wanty”.
    Progressivism is completely exposed as an utter failure. This has been shown to last for a few generations at most.
    Result: America is once again “the Shining City on the Hill”.

    This is where my inner nerd comes out.

    I think we are currently in #0. With our current political situation as is, I see the chances moving forward as:

    A. Obama re-election 51%
    We would then have a 50% chance to move into #1 (Negative re-enforcement) if The Tea Party continues to be vocal. Otherwise, we stay in #0. No chance for #2 or #3.

    B. RINO election 48%
    We would then have a 0% chance to move into #1 (Negative re-enforcement) as the failure of his progressive policies would
    be blamed on the “Conservative”. So we stay in #0. No chance for #2 or #3.

    C. Conservative election: 1% (I don’t even see anyone out there).
    We would no longer be in #0. We would then have a 0% chance to move into #1 (Negative re-enforcement) since we wouldn’t have any new progressive policy failures. We would have an 80% chance of #2 (Positive re-enforcement), and a 20% chance of #3 (Enlightenment) depending on how alert the populace is (not very).

    Summary:
    Stay in #0 (Denial): A (25.5%) + B (48%) + C (0%) = 73.5%
    Move to #1 (Negative re-enforcement): A (25.5%) + B (0%) + C (0%) = 25.5%
    Move to #2 (Positive re-enforcement): A (0%) + B (0%) + C (0.8%) = 0.8%
    Move to #3 (Enlightenment): A (0%) + B (0%) + C (0.2%) = 0.2%

    I think I’ll go open a vein, now.

  15. TomR, armed in Texas
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 12:26 pm |

    Gingrich is a politician who preaches patriotism. He had a chance to walk the walk, but took numerous draft deferrments to avoid possible Vietnam service. That, and his flip flopping on issues, his narcissism, his marital cheating, his fanatical pursuit of wealth, his arrogance – - – - -hell ,that’s enough reason for me to mistrust and dislike the turd.

  16. Lance
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 12:49 pm |

    AZ, thanks for your considered & thoughtful screed!
    You have now taken the Porch Prize for the longest
    comment other than bocopro!!

    Jus’ stumbled upon ‘nother innerestin’ Newt post:

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/13/does-newt-gingrich-want-the-constitution-to-die/

    Why am I getting “Bull in the China shop” vibes ’bout Newt??

  17. AZHolmes
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 12:57 pm |

    Hey Lance, at least I apologized in advance!

  18. MCPO
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

    Anyone

    But

    Obama

  19. Lance
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 1:31 pm |

    Yeah, you did AZ!
    In fact I’m gonna read your comment later
    when I’ve more time, to give it some consideration!

    Hey Chief, check out yessaday’s post ’bout OMG!

  20. Lance
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 1:42 pm |

    Frogotz: What TomR, (15) said, just for openers!

    I no longer trust Newt, as far as I can throw him, based on the latest
    verified information surfacing ’bout him.
    My hunch is that the MSM will promote him insanely to the repub
    voters, out of their fear of someone like Rick Perry, plus he’s so
    attackable! I also think Sarah’cuda is keeeping her head down for very
    important reasons. Like when you hunt Mooses.

  21. AZHolmes
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 2:13 pm |

    Yeah, Lance, that’s what I was afraid of. I’m not sure I’d read it ;).

    Your link (16) confirmed some of my thinking, too.

    I’m not sure ANYone but Obama is necessarily a good thing, long term (see 14 above, if you dare). But, it would certainly improve my retirement prospects (thinking of my 401k since Jan. ’09).

  22. Claire: barbarian, etc
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 7:12 pm |

    Casca’s a fine individual and I enjoy his comments; but we may hafta agree that he’s worng on this one to disagree…

    AZ – wish I could. As it stands… *passes the scotch*

    MCPO – gotta disagree with ya on this one. If we grab one of these “electable” [*ptui*] Prog-atives on offer we might savor the moment that irritating little worm slinks off the stage. [for a month or so, only to return like Jimmah Carter. ...or a bad Kung Pao.]

    But in the morning we’ll hafta deal with Prog Policies dressed up in fancy, PseudoConservative Drag, like some frankensteinian Thai Tranny of Politics. After a three-day binge.

    Better we stick with the Prog we have — the one who has pissed off his ‘base’, irritated the ‘middle’, and insulted every faction/group and Individual out there. I’m pretty sure he won’t tone that down; in face I bet he’ll double down on the arrogance thang. It’s how he rolls…

    Since the “R” Party gave us NOTHING with which to combat him, it will either re-organize, tossing out all the “establishment R’s”, or it will be replaced with one of the many start-ups that are popping up all over. Maybe the whole resultant mess will be enough to get folks pissed enough to actually think it thru [like AZHolmes demonstrated so well above] and kicked out of their comfortable routines enough to DO something about it: like maybe return to Original Principles? Since I’ve yet to see any better ideas out there.

    By then we’ll be broke enough that the majority will be ready to say “Enough, already” to the “Entitled Class.”

    See also: Pyrrhic victory

    Just my impression…

  23. ZZMike
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 7:28 pm |

    It’s the California election all over again. That time, Whitman and Fiorina went after each other like saber-tooth tigers, Jerry Brown just sat back and watched, and waited. Then won handily.

    This time, the Republican candidates are going after each other tooth and nail. Meanwhile, Obama just sits back and watches, and waits till they’re all pulverized. And wins handily.

    “The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution”

    He echoes Obama’s lament that China has it ever so much better than we do. The Chief says “let it be written, let it be done”, and it is.

    But never fear, we’re getting there.

    DougM: “Second-best involves a career-limiting drawback.”

    And that would be an uncontrolled impact with terrain.

    About that “pledge”: Here’s the relevant text (my emphasis):

    “Defending Marriage. As President, I will vigorously enforce the Defense of Marriage Act,… I also pledge to uphold the institution of marriage through personal fidelity to my spouse and respect for the marital bonds of others.”

    And if he doesn’t get to the White House?

    AZHolmes: You’re channeling Marvin the Robot from “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”.

    But in the end, the GOP candidates will annihilate one another, aided by the ever-friendly MSM; Obama will build his war chest, and come next October, unleash the dogs of war.

    (Hmmm. Maybe AZHolmes is an optomist…)

  24. JoeBandMember
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 8:23 pm |

    “If a man can’t be faithful to his wife”

    Shit, man, I thought being unfaithful was a prerequisite.

  25. Mac Wade
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 8:41 pm |

    I want to know why the MSM is calling him a Tea Party favorite. OK I know. We don’t want Mittens and everyone else is getting skewered. They are trying to once again pick the candidate and it is not working out for them.

    Newt is a big government Progressive and I hope no Conservatives fall for him. I will never again hold my nose when I vote. And if that means another 4 years of 0bama, so be it. Fuck the Republican party if they cannot get it together this time. Jesus Christ, I’m ready to pull the lever for Ron Paul and then go out and shoot myself. At least he is consistent.

    And fuck Mitt Romney too, I will not vote for him. EVER!

  26. mech
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 8:41 pm |

    I am still in agreement that the candidates need to stop savaging each other and explain to us how they will serve us better than the incumbent, turning the economy around and bringing spine back to the white house.

    I still have reservations about the carefully coiffed mitt (still don’t know what kind of name that is), crazy uncle paul, and short of a strong sprint from behind from one of the others, will take Newt, if only for how he scares the daylights out of so many ‘establishment types’.

  27. Mac Wade
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 9:30 pm |

    Newt “Real Politik Wilsonian” Gingrich

    “The 4 freedoms still work.”
    1 Freedom of speech and expression
    2 Freedom of worship
    3 Freedom from want (OWS)
    4 Freedom from fear

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T76lD4zV1bo

  28. Mac Wade
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:09 pm |

    By this time, Newt should be getting crucified in the press.

    Why Newt Gingrich Won’t Be President. May 2011

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tHykQP-Ohg&feature=related

  29. Mac Wade
    Posted December 13, 2011 at 10:17 pm |

    OK this is the last one. I promise. I hope no one on the porch will even consider this abomination of a candidate. Anyone reading this should work to derail his candidacy. Tell your friends.

    “Newt Gingrich. Informative speech on his background”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IUtPYOSGlww

  30. Posted December 14, 2011 at 1:25 am |

    I have my favorite in this field and it isn’t Newt. Still, if Newt wins the nomination, and I hope he doesn’t, I will low crawl through broken glass and shards of shrapnel to vote for him next November.

    I have my favorite in this field and it isn’t Mitt. Still, if Mitt wins the primary, and I hope he doesn’t, I will low crawl through broken glass and shrapnel shards to vote for him in November.

    Getting the picture?

  31. geezerette
    Posted December 14, 2011 at 7:44 am |

    Izzzat the new changed for the better Newt or the old Newt?

  32. DougM (jackassophobe)
    Posted December 14, 2011 at 8:32 am |

    Nobody running agrees with me on everything.
    Nobody running can fix the gov’t alone.
    Nobody running would be as big a disaster as any Democrat.
    Nobody running will be safe from character assassins.
    Nobody running is a sure-thing against Obama.
    Nobody running is named Washington, Jefferson, or Reagan.
    etc.

    Newt’s positives:
    • Understands Congress and its relationship with the Executive Branch
    • The Contract with America idea was brilliant
    • Understands the Battle of Gettysburg
    • Can out-debate Diogenes Demosthenes, in English anyway
    • Is not as fat as Christie
    (What? Oh, yeah, I’m sure there’s prob’ly more.)

  33. Mac Wade
    Posted December 14, 2011 at 7:52 pm |

    @Peter #30
    I get the picture.
    Let me know when:
    Your sprained labia heals or

    You get your spine back.

    mac_wade@comcast.net