Conference call with Newt Gingrich

posted at 1:15 pm on May 17, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Newt Gingrich opened by saying that his remarks on MTP were not intended to be controversial, but says that David Gregory and the venue are partly to blame.  For instance, the references to food stamps and Detroit during his interview were not “racist”, despite the claims made on the show.  This shows the adversarial nature of the program.

Gingrich then said that the problems arose from a “confusing conversation” around a “very specific question” about imposing change over objections in the electorate. He admitted that he used language that was “too strong,” but that critics were ignoring the specific nature of the question and its context about “imposing” unpopular solutions.  Gingrich announced that he signed a pledge to repeal ObamaCare this morning, saying that he was the first Presidential candidate to do so in this cycle, and that any health-care solution should respect the Tenth Amendment.  Congress has to find a way to have people pay for the health care they receive rather than act as “free riders.”

He will reach out to Paul Ryan and hopes to find a way to work with them on budget and entitlement reform.  He also says that he will work hard to strengthen the House Republican majority and take the majority in the Senate.

Questions:

  • Kerry Picket — People are talking about your changing positions on several issues, including Libya and cap-and-trade — Gingrich says he has always been clear on his opposition to cap and trade.  On Libya, he says he was responding to changes in the situation as an analyst.  He rejects the notion that an 18-year-old remark on mandates during the HillaryCare debate.  “The scale of change we are proposing is very, very large and affects people in an intimate way,” Gingrich says. “We want to make sure that the American people support it.”
  • Me: Would you still vote for Ryan’s plan as you said to Time? — I would vote for the budget, Gingrich says, but the bill on making the necessary changes is another matter.  “It should be a net asset to vote for a Medicare bill,” Gingrich says.  Follow-up: Is it possible to separate the Medicare entitlement from the budget?  Gingrich says yes, and that we are going to have to pass the budget while building support for some kind of Medicare reform in parallel.
  • On another question, Gingrich responded that “seniors like to be told that they can choose, but hate being told that they must choose … Part of what I’m worried about is compelling people to adapt to radical change that has yet to be tested.”  There is an advantage to starting off with voluntary programs, Gingrich argues, with a few hundred thousand volunteers, that allow the program to adapt to issues as they arise on a much more manageable scale.  He’s still in favor of a premium-support model.
  • Jim Hoft: How will you respond to Democrats who plan to use your statement in political ads?  Gingrich says that he will be glad to cut ads for candidates explaining that Democrats are trying to sell fear.  They’re doing exactly what FDR warned against.
  • Red County: You have a reputation for being undisciplined.  Is this fair, and if it is, how do you plan to address it? – If anything, Gingrich says, he didn’t go into the MTP interview “quite hostile enough.”  He has the problem of talking like an analyst rather than a candidate.  “Every once in a while, you have a problem and you have to spend three or four days fixing it.”
  • Guy Benson: How specifically is Ryan’s Medicare plan “right wing social engineering”? – What term would you use to describe imposing unpopular solutions on the electorate?  If the American people voluntarily change the system, then that’s not social engineering but a demonstration of a free society.

Ben Domenech objected to the assumption in my question, saying that support for Ryan’s budget doesn’t necessarily mean support for the bills that pass the budget into law.  It’s true that budgets are spending plans, not specific authorizations, and that much depends on the language in the bills themselves.  But when people hear about “Ryan’s plan,” as Time reporter Jay Newton-Small phrased her question, they’re generally talking about his plans to reform Medicare, not how much money he plans to spend on the Department of Justice.  Even allowing for that, though, Ryan’s budget plan relies on the reform of Medicare, as it posits a significant reduction in deficit spending from mandatory programs.

Update: Did Gingrich help himself with the conference call?  I’m not sure that helped or hurt himself.  He expressed a lot of appreciation for Ryan’s work, but once again warned about “radical change.”  Further, I’m still a little unconvinced on the point about voluntary change that Gingrich keeps making.  It sounds like an argument to do nothing and wait for public opinion to come around before advancing solutions — which may not be a bad strategy for issues that aren’t terribly acute.  We’re running a $1.6 trillion annual deficit now, though, and our national debt is rapidly approaching 100% of our GDP.  Shouldn’t elected officials demonstrate some leadership in a crisis?

Update II: Jim Geraghty points out that Newt has taken the party on before — with bad results.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Home to roost Newt…..you and your pals in crime Rove and the Krautster sat and criticized, mocked andlaughed at Sarah for the interviews she had with Couric and Charlie POS Gibson. Hey old timer……she makes you look like the fool that you are. Move aside and hang em up….

highninside on May 17, 2011 at 5:47 PM

I agree with the guy in Iowa who said Newt should take himself out of it now, before he beclowns himself further.

I WILL NOT VOTE FOR A RINO IN 2012

disa on May 17, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Newt is toast. The fact that he is complaining about the venue tells you a lot about his leadership skills. They stink. I use to like Newt; but with Scozaffazo, and with Pelosi, and now this… he blew it.

mbabbitt on May 17, 2011 at 6:07 PM

This leads me to a reconsideration of Margaret Thatcher’s famous dictum – “the trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money” really isn’t accurate. We ran out of “other people’s money” a long time ago. As of today, the public sector spends about 60%-80% more each year than it receives in taxes, i.e. “other people’s money.” The “money” it spends is created out of thin air by the Fed monetizing the Treasury debt. Thus, when are we, the world, going to wake up and wonder what do these little green rectangles – or virtual electrons – actually represent. It sure ain’t gold, like it used to be. So what is it? I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings to Newt, but radical change is baked into the mathematical cake. The only question is will it be controlled structural transformation or uncontrolled societal unwinding?

boqueronman on May 17, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Seems to me Newt was one of those who didn’t think Sarah was ready for prime time… Jeez Newt, looks like your standing knee deep in your own self created do-do pile. Exactly how long did that take you Newt? In the mean while, Sarah lives in all of their heads 24/7.

Keemo on May 17, 2011 at 7:33 PM

He is still a Newtered Newt. He lost me in 1997-1998. He has lost me again. He shoots from the hip. That’s not good in a POTUS.

{^_^}

herself on May 18, 2011 at 6:55 AM

Newt’s Campaign Obituary: “Nancy and Scozzafava”

Dandapani on May 19, 2011 at 6:31 AM

Comment pages: 1 2