Newt makes his way to church on Sunday.

Romney tried to prevent Gingrich from having one of his signature ‘moments.’ | AP Photo

Close

Related Posts:

I used to like Newt back in the 1990’s but a lot has changed since then.

Take a look at this fine article from the Cato Institute:

Gingrich Rise Is Triumph of Style over Substance

by Gene Healy

This article appeared in DC Examiner on January 24, 2012.

On the eve of Newt Gingrich’s landslide victory in the South Carolina primary, CNN’s Erin Burnett let the former speaker expound on the success of his “kick the moderator” debate strategy.

“I think there’s something going on here that’s very deep,” Gingrich said. “People want a leader who’s forceful… Part of it is, you know, if I’d said ‘The color is blue!’ — it’s the forcefulness… That delivery, that clearness is as important as the specific topic,” he explained.

Watching the interview, I had a disturbing thought: Has Newt Gingrich become self-aware?

I’ve never heard a better explanation for the former speaker’s ability to cloud conservatives’ minds. How, after all, did a man who’s the very model of a Beltway-consensus influence-peddler convince Tea Party voters he represents “real change”? It’s the “forcefulness,” stupid!

Unfortunately, what’s going on here is not “very deep.” Gingrich’s rise represents the triumph of rhetorical style over substance. In a way, it’s the ultimate tribute to Barack Obama.

The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein asked a good question on Sunday: “What are Newt Gingrich’s big ideas?” “I’m at a loss to name even one,” he admitted.

Gingrich has an enviable rep as a one-man think tank, but in his wilderness years, he made a sweet living as a “forceful” pitchman for utterly conventional center-left policies: Medicaid expansion, the individual mandate, cap and trade, “clean energy” subsidies, and the like. Newt does a great impression of a red-state firebrand, but when it comes to policy, “the color is blue.”

That’s not to say that Gingrich has never had an unconventional idea. This is a guy who bragged in a 2005 GQ interview that “I first talked about [saving civilization] in August of 1958” — when he was a rising sophomore in high school.

Some of Gingrich’s big ideas are charmingly batty. Given his worries about global warming, Newt has probably abandoned his 1984 plan for “a mirror system in space” that “could affect the earth’s climate by increasing the amount of sunlight.”

But the Trekkie zeal remains, judging by one of my favorite recent headlines: “Gingrich Said Freddie Mac Could Be Good Model for Mars Travel” (Bloomberg, Dec. 2, 2011).

Gingrich’s rise represents the triumph of rhetorical style over substance.

Some of Gingrich’s other fancies are less charming. The candidate who’s warned of a “gay and secular fascism” sweeping the country has an impressive authoritarian streak of his own.

As Klein notes, in 1996, Gingrich had the “big idea” of instituting the death penalty for anyone who brought more than 2 ounces of marijuana into the United States.

Today, Gingrich condemns the Stop Online Piracy Act as censorship, but in 2006 he supported empowering “federal judges who’ve served in combat” to shut down “jihadist” websites.

What Ever Happened to the Human Race?

Bachmann was a student of the works of Francis Schaeffer like I am and I know she was pro-life because of it. (Observe video clip above and picture of Schaeffer.) I hated to see her go.

 DES MOINES, Iowa — Last night, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann vowed to soldier on in her bid for the Republican presidential nomination. This morning, she decided to suspend her campaign.

“Last night the people of Iowa spoke with a very clear voice, and so I have decided to stand aside,” she told supporters and reporters in West Des Moines this morning.

According to campaign spokesman Alice Stewart, Bachmann took last night to pray and consider how she might best move forward.

“She saw that [Iowa voters] coalesced around other candidates, and she just, she didn’t have it in her heart to continue,” Stewart told reporters this morning.

Stewart also said that campaign finance was not a factor in the decision.

“Money was not an issue at all. As you saw, we had a full schedule in South Carolina. We were planning to move full speed ahead and also go to the debates in New Hampshire and events after that,” she said.

[Bachmann’s Decline: What Happened?]

In announcing her campaign’s suspension, Bachmann struck a cautionary tone about what she considers to be the Obama administration’s destructive policies, which she will continue to fight.

“I ran because I realized 2012 is our last chance and our only chance to repeal ‘Obamacare’ and Dodd-Frank, and I knew how to get rid of both of them,” she said.

For Bachmann’s supporters, the announcement was clearly a letdown. One man’s eyes welled up as Bachmann announced her decision to step aside.

“I mean, I understand it’s part of the process–kind of narrowing the field, that’s why we have the caucuses,” says Acacia Scott, a junior at the University of Northern Iowa who’s from Norwalk, Iowa, and says she backed Bachmann for the last month and a half. “But I supported her for a reason.”

[See photos of Michele Bachmann.]

Now those supporters must decide whom to back next. For Scott, it won’t be easy.

“Ultimately, yes, I’d love to get behind another presidential candidate and get Obama out of office,” she says, but adds that she has only had eyes for Bachmann during the race.

“As of right now, no, I don’t have my eye on another candidate,” Scott explained.

Ryan Rose, the Tea Party Coalition chair for the Bachmann campaign, is similarly undecided about whom else in the race he could support.

“I honestly have no clue. I think I will be reassessing and try to push the same principles I believe she has advanced,” said Rose.

[See how candidates appealed to teens in Iowa.]

Campaign spokesperson Alice Stewart told reporters this morning that Bachmann is still undecided as to which other candidate she will endorse in the race for the Republican nomination.

Still, Bachmann “doesn’t see where she made any mistakes” and is proud of her campaign, according to Stewart, who added, “She has certainly no room whatsoever for regret.”

Related posts:

Why is Ron Paul surging? (Part 3)

The liberals have been successful at getting government to spend over 25 percent of our total GDP, but the problem is that money is running out. Actually it ran out a long time ago. In 2011 we spent 3.8 trillion and took in a little over half that amount. At that rate we will be going bankrupt a few years after Greece.

I think the future looks bright for politicans like Ron Paul. There are several reasons why Ron Paul has surged in the polls. Let me list some of the reasons this has happened. These reasons are taken from the article by Edward Crane, “Why Ron Paul Matters,” Wall Street Journal, Dec 31, 2011:
• Austrian economics. Mr. Paul is often criticized for references to what some consider obscure economists of the so-called Austrian School. People should read them before criticizing. Nobel laureate Friedrich von Hayek and his mentor Ludwig von Mises were two of the greatest economists and social scientists ever to live.

Modern Austrian School economists such as Lawrence H. White, now at George Mason University, and Fred Foldvary at Santa Clara University predicted the housing bubble and the recession that followed the massive, multitrillion-dollar malinvestment caused by government redirection of capital into housing. Mr. Paul, like Austrian School economists, understands that we would be better off with a gold standard, competing currencies or a monetary rule than with the arbitrary and discretionary powers of our out-of-control Federal Reserve.

Mr. Paul should be given credit for his efforts to promote these ideas and other libertarian policies, all of which would make America better off. He’d be the first to admit he’s not the most erudite candidate to make the case, but surely part of his appeal is his very genuine persona.