Audio: Newt Gingrich “in a benign sense … is a totalitarian,” says Mark Steyn

posted at 8:00 pm on December 17, 2011 by Tina Korbe

This, to balance out my anti-Mitt post earlier. The truest sentence Mark Steyn speaks in this audio: Newt Gingrich has “solutions to stuff most of us didn’t know were problems.” I’ll let Steyn’s statements about Gingrich speak for themselves:

Rather than add more about what we don’t want in a president, I’d like to offer a model for what I, at least, would like. Steyn references Calvin Coolidge as the quintessential conservative president. He’s onto something. Silent Cal truly grasped that less is more. Here, indeed, is a lesson for our crony-capitalism-plagued times, from Coolidge, via Paul Johnson in A History of the American People:

Later that year [1925], in an address to the New York Chamber of Commerce, Coolidge produced a classic and lapidary statement of his own laissez-fair philosophy. Government and business, he said, should remain independent and separate, one directed from Washington, the other from New York. Wise and prudent men should always prevent the mutual usurpations which foolish men sought on either side. Business was the pursuit of gain but it also had a moral purpose: ‘the mutual organized effort of society to minister to the economic requirement of civilization … It rests squarely on the law of service. It has for its main reliance truth and faith and justice. In its larger sense it is is one of the greatest contributing forces to the moral and spiritual advancement of the race.’ That was why government had a warrant to promote its success by providing the conditions of competition within a framework of security. The job of government and law was to suppress privilege wherever it manifested itself and uphold lawful possession by providing legal remedies for all wrongs: ‘The prime element in the value of all property is the knowledge that its peaceful enjoyment will be publicly defended.’ Without this legal and public defense ‘the value of your tall buildings would shrink to the price of the waterfront of old Carthage or corner-lots in ancient Babylon.’ The more business regulated itself, he concluded, the less need there would be for government to act to insure competition. It could therefore concentrate on its twin tasks of economy and of improving the national structure within which business could increase profits and investment, raise wages and provide better goods and services at the lowest possible prices.

(Read the full address here.)

And, as a matter of personal taste, how nice would it be if our politicians said a whole lot less? As Coolidge put it, “I don’t recall any candidate for president that ever injured himself very much by not talking.’ Or again: ‘The things I never say never get me into trouble.’ All our candidates could stand to learn that lesson.

Parting thought: Coolidge was president in the twentieth century, and Newt still chooses FDR as the “greatest”?


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 3 4

Or like Coulter.

itsnotaboutme on December 17, 2011 at 9:03 PM

You’re right, it’s pretty rich coming from her. I’ve always thought that the reason sh is so enamored with Gov. Christie is that he is the male version of herself.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:09 PM

The man has a freaking 90% ACU rating.
cpaulus on December 17, 2011 at 8:51 PM

McCain’s was 86%.
Newt’s misdeeds & bad ideas were mostly outside of his votes on the floor.
Gingrich is the only Speaker of the House ever to have been disciplined for an ethics violation.
Gingrich once announced to reporters that a personal grudge against President Clinton affected his duties as Speaker.
Gingrich dumped his first wife because he fell for another woman, & after marrying her, he dumped her when he fell for yet another.
Gingrich accepted $1,500,000 in “consulting” fees from the corrupto-crats at Freddie Mac, which probably were actually lobbying fees, which is probably illegal.
Gingrich bragged about being a moderate with this comment: “There is a new synthesis evolving with the classic moderate wing of the party, where as a former Rockefeller state chairman, I’ve spent most of my life.”
Gingrich starred in a 2007 global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi that was sponsored by Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection. He has since has flip-flopped spectacularly on global warming.
Gingrich was paid $312,000 by ethanol interests, and then said ethanol is good for national security and for the economy.
Gingrich has consistently supported the type of individual mandates for health insurance that conservatives are trying to overturn through court challenges to Obamacare.
Gingrich went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and called Paul Ryan’s Medicare plan “radical” and “right-wing social engineering.”
Gingrich said of the Medicare prescription drug plan that was the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society, “Every conservative member of Congress should vote for this Medicare bill. Obstructionist conservatives can always find reasons to vote no.”
Gingrich attacked Steve Largent, Tom Coburn and other conservatives as “the Perfectionist Caucus,” while giving his last speech as speaker in support of Dick Gephardt and Dave Obey’s colossal Omnibus Bill of 1998.
Gingrich flipped & then flopped on abortion:
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/newt-unwilling-say-life-begins-conception/235106
More serious Gingrich problems:
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/284472/newt-gingrich-said-iwhati

itsnotaboutme on December 17, 2011 at 9:09 PM

How can you be a totalitarian in a benign sense?

You either are, or you are not one. You can’t be a moderate totalitarian as Steyn seems to be asserting here.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:09 PM

Mark Steyn is a fraud. He may be occasionally witty and snarky at times but when push comes to shove he is one of the establishment bunch. Steyn thought Pawlenty/Bachmann was a great ticket and disparaged Sarah Palin. I will never forget that. It doesn’t surprise that Mark Steyn is anti-Newt Gingrich. Wake up. These Beltway Class types and NRO hacks want Romney. Mark Steyn is just another pretender. Stick to Mark Levin and El Rushbo.

CoolChange80 on December 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM

We’re scroomed with all this confusion.

A bit of this technique…in a confused sort of way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Newt ain’t that bad. I like Mark Steyn, but this over-the-top rhetoric about Newt must be borne out of some personal issues between the two. Mark needs to take a deep breath and count to 10 or something. doorsxp on December 17, 2011 at 8:08 PM

The only thing over the top is your dumb accusation. You don’t have to have a low IQ to believe Freddie Mac Gingrich is a conservative, but it helps. Steyn is very smart.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 9:12 PM

At some point, don’t all these add up to more than just one-off “slips”?

peachaeo on December 17, 2011 at 8:59 PM

They all add up to me but Newt is the great debater, is the only one who will go after Obama or something.

Too many people wanting to win the battle of the debates but aren’t paying attention to how we win the war/election.

JPeterman on December 17, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Ann Coulter was telling us to support the bombastic Chris Christie or Romney would be our nominee and we would lose. This was like 9 months ago. That goes down the memory hole, I guess, with Ann.
Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:06 PM

There was a video up here, I think in the Headlines section where she says since Christie – her true love – was an option at the time, Romney was a spoiler (something to that effect). With him out, it was a second look at Romney for her. At least that’s her story.

whatcat on December 17, 2011 at 9:13 PM

You’re right, it’s pretty rich coming from her. I’ve always thought that the reason sh is so enamored with Gov. Christie is that he is the male version of herself.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:09 PM

I think she loves Christie because he takes on the public sector unions. IIRC, her dad was a union-busting lawyer.

predator on December 17, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Hugh Hewitt has a negative impact on anyone he comes in contact with. The plain and simple truth is that Hugh is infected with Shillpylis. The nastiest bug around. Steyn should get a few shots from the nurse and stop jumping in between the sheets with Hugh.

Spirit Crusher on December 17, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Steyn’s employer National Review has endorsed Mitt Romney.

But they believe is Newt Gingrich is a benign form of Stalin. In fact, really the only Republican they seem to criticize on ideology is Newt. They never talk about Paul Ryan’s horrible voting record on fiscal matters, for example.

I donn’t know, this is a bizaree election cycle.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Yep, Ann has quite irrevocably outed herself.

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:17 PM

I actually trust Newt the least of all the candidates. Newt thinks he’s the smartest man in the room and can outsmart the rest of us.

Case in point: Newt’s immigration plan. It amounts to amnesty as the courts will never go along with his “you can be a permanent legal alien resident, but can never be a citizen” line. Newt knows this because he’s always been pro-amnesty and pro-illegal, but he thinks he can outsmart us.

bw222 on December 17, 2011 at 9:19 PM

I make my own judgements based on fact, research, interviews, and debates.

I really don’t need Mark Steyn, Ann Coulter and other talking heads to tell me how I feel about a candidate.

celt on December 17, 2011 at 9:19 PM

predator on December 17, 2011 at 9:14 PM

And that he does it vocally is a bonus.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Who gives a crap about ratings? Are you satisfied where we are right now? 70% of many people’s earnings are confiscated by taxes (federal/state income taxes, gas tax, phone tax, tolls, sales tax, property tax, utility tax…..)? Do you only blame liberals for that? Pragmatism is only good to a point, there comes a time when lines are not discernable. I have grown to hate the pseudo (Bush/McCain/Gingrich/Romney/Huntsman/Christie/Pataki/Bloomburg/Whitman/Graham/Hatch) conservatives in our midst. At least the socialists are up front with their BS.

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:04 PM

Well for one you’re adding state taxes, etc, Secondly, you don’t get what pragmatism means. If you think Newt is Bloomburg, a former Democrat, you’re kidding yourself. The guy literally produced the most conservative federal government we’ve had on a fiscal level since The Great Society. Oh, but he did a commercial w/ Pelosi, and then, of course, went to Congress and slammed cap and trade. But he’s Stalin or something because he doesn’t think all government is bad, which of course, it isn’t. It’s ridiculous.

cpaulus on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

All I know is I never heard conservatives calling Newt a benign version of Stalin until he took a lead over Romney in the polls.

Chalk it up to coincidence, I guess. :)

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Steyn’s employer National Review has endorsed Mitt Romney.

But they believe is Newt Gingrich is a benign form of Stalin. In fact, really the only Republican they seem to criticize on ideology is Newt. They never talk about Paul Ryan’s horrible voting record on fiscal matters, for example.

I donn’t know, this is a bizaree election cycle.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:15 PM

You, sir, are exactly right……

MTLassen on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

I dont think I can tolerate reading and hearing more negative news about Newt, no one is defending him on the right , how can he stay in the race I wounder. Only Rush and Levine havn’t come out against him so far.

evergreenland on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:17 PM

I understand that she thinks Romney is the best option but I don’t seen any reason to insult the voter. Even if it’s suppose to be a “joke”.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

This thread is a food fight with canned food. Yikes.

platypus on December 17, 2011 at 9:21 PM

I guess by Monday some pundit we all once respected will come out with an article claiming that Gingrich takes antipsychotic medication or something.

Aitch748 on December 17, 2011 at 9:22 PM

Mark Steyn is a fraud.

CoolChange80 on December 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM

Mark Steyn is totally awesome, IMO, and completely right about Newt, but Ann Coulter is wrong about Romney.

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Steyn is a very astute observer, no question about it. But anybody who chooses to ignore the fact that Gingrich is the ONLY f@cking candidate who has a RECORD of rolling back the entitlement state is a fool.This election cycle is insane. Totally insane…… MTLassen on December 17, 2011 at 8:16 PM

As Newt says, he’s changed. Why, more recently, he was pushing a socialist mortgage scheme that created a housing bubble and nearly destroyed the banking system. His involvement in this debacle was so embarrassing that he lied about it when he was exposed. As you said, Steyn is a very astute observer. Unlike you.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Newt and Romney supporters seem to have irreconcilable differences. Since most Newt supporters and Romney supporters have Bachmann as their second choice, I think, she seems to be the most appropriate unity candidate.

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:27 PM

I understand that she thinks Romney is the best option but I don’t seen any reason to insult the voter. Even if it’s suppose to be a “joke”.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

A joke at the expense of conservatives, which she doesn’t seem to count herself among.

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:28 PM

Steyn took this story about some 85 year old woman getting patted down at an airport to make the case that all these airport security people are a bunch of sex perverts who head to work eager to grope old women all day. He just assumed the woman was being honest about her mistreatment as though an old person never lies.

I’m sorry, when you start taking the exception to the rule and making it the rule, you lose crediblity. I think both Steyn and Ann Coulter have gone Ron Paul nutty on airport security.

But they have no problem with Romney being in charge of their healthcare. No worries there!

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:28 PM

Aitch748 on December 17, 2011 at 9:22 PM

I don’t care what they say anymore, I’m going to vote for Gingrich in the Florida primary even if he is in less that single digit approval. The media and establishment Republicans with their tactics of personal destruction of candidates not of their choosing is ridiculous and manipulative. I am a contrarian voter. In the general I’ll vote for ABO.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:31 PM

PUNCHENKO! I need to know…is that really you? Or has your name been hijacked??? No more Newt?

BACH ROCKS!

balkanmom on December 17, 2011 at 9:31 PM

I recommend everyone buy coolidge’s autobiography, and book of quotes.

http://www.amazon.com/Autobiography-Calvin-Coolidge/dp/1410216225/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1324175280&sr=8-2

Great speach

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5puwTrLRhmw

jaboba on December 17, 2011 at 9:31 PM

As Coolidge put it, “I don’t recall any candidate for president that ever injured himself very much by not talking.’ Or again: ‘The things I never say never get me into trouble.’

It’s too bad Jethro Perry wasn’t given this advice at the beginning of his cattle drive for the nomination. He could be a’shoein’ the winning horse if he had.

Newt is sorta the anti-Coolidge – never shuts up even when he has nothing to say.

As to Perry, there are some, having listened to him babble contrary to Coolidge’s practice, who would say that he is a dumb, fairly stupid, doofus cowboy.

Of course, as an ardent Perry supporter, I would never say such things.

Horace on December 17, 2011 at 9:31 PM

Mr. Steyn is fine, welcome to his opinion and I believe isn’t eligible to vote, so thanks for playing.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Have you noticed that everytime conservatives merely disagree with somebody seen as a “true conservative” like Mark Steyn or Ann Coulter, somebody will accuse us of calling them RINOs?

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Newt respects the history and cultural traditions of this country and will fight to preserve them. To me this is the most important issue next to the economy. I know that Bachmann and Santorum would also be strong on these issues, but I think Gingrich is more forceful.

Rose on December 17, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Steyn is very smart.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Steyn IS very smart. A clever and humorous writer along with being a great observer of social patterns.

That doesn’t necessarily mean he is right about the best solution.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with his opinion…its just his opinion. The annoying thing is having people of influence sway peoples decisions via logical fallacies. Appeal to Authority can be a comfort to lazy thinkers imo.

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 9:33 PM

I think “brokered” is far too polite a word for what we’ll be seeing at the convention.

rrpjr on December 17, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Now I remember who this steyn doofus is. He’s the boring schmuck i
turn off when rush is on vacay

rik on December 17, 2011 at 9:34 PM

Well for one you’re adding state taxes, etc,
cpaulus on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Why the F— wouldn’t I? THEY ARE ALL MONEYS TAKEN FROM ME.

If you think Newt is Bloomburg, a former Democrat, you’re kidding yourself. The guy literally produced the most conservative federal government we’ve had on a fiscal level since The Great Society. cpaulus on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Shades, my friend, shades. I’ve come to the simple conclusion that keeping one’s own money affords one the greatest liberty. I’m not rich, but my wife and I make 200K and over 120K is gobbled up by some form of tax. That’s wrong and there are as many republicans responsible for this as there are democrats.

Oh, but he did a commercial w/ Pelosi, and then, of course, went to Congress and slammed cap and trade. But he’s Stalin or something because he doesn’t think all government is bad, which of course, it isn’t. It’s ridiculous.

“if you’re not a part of the solution, you’re a part of the problem.” John McClane, Die Hard

Why the f— would you defend this guy? The Fannie/Freddie debacle alone should be enough to make him a pariah – am I conversing w/ Newt’s mom?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

All these people that have been ripping Newt better hope and pray that Newt does not get the Republican nomination and win in 2012.Because if Newt wins it all. Pay back is going to be HELL for these people and you can take that to the bank.

logman1 on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Mark Steyn is a fraud.

CoolChange80 on December 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM

and kingsjester is really a 23 yr old Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader named Buffy

tommy-t on December 17, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Newt wants to be the Republican FDR.

DO NOT WANT!

Incandescent on December 17, 2011 at 9:37 PM

People are ignoring the fact that Coolidge was a quiet person by nature. It’s easy for a quiet person to have his philosophy of never talking.

Asking Newtie poo not to talk seems like a pipe dream.

And it’s really not true that the things you don’t say can’t hurt you. Lot of the times the things you don’t say hurt you in your personal life. The main reason people have conflict is a lack of communication with each other.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:33 PM

I watch Democrat operatives use that tactic, it doesn’t make any difference if it’s true, the important thing is to say it and hope not one requires proof.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Newt and Romney supporters seem to have irreconcilable differences. Since most Newt supporters and Romney supporters have Bachmann as their second choice, I think, she seems to be the most appropriate unity candidate.

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Bachman is the last candidate I would vote for including Ron Paul.
I would sit on my hands before voting for her.
She is a shill for Romney doing his hit jobs while that gutless punk plays the statesman.
She praised Newt just a few years ago and now has taken a hatchet job to any who threaten Mitts front runner status.
She has no record no accomplishments, and is simply play bad cop to Mitts good cop hoping for some crumbs from the rich mans table as are many in the Republican Party.
The establishment knows Mitt is willing to spend much of his personal fortune to try to achieve his dream of POTUS.
Both are ambitious way beyond their abilities and accomplishments!
Newt is a self made man and a fighter who is by far the most intelligent of the seven dwarfs.

ConcealedKerry on December 17, 2011 at 9:41 PM

Newt is the Pied Piper of today’s Republicans, as BHO was to the Democrats in 2008.
(And no…Romney doesn’t play the flute for me either!)

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Newt and Romney supporters .

FloatingRock on December 17, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Wha? Aren’t they the same person? Well, Romney doesn’t have that Fannie/Freddie debacle hanging around his neck, but wait, oh crap - Romneycare. I so wanted to be energized to go after Obama, the socialist from hell. I can’t belive this is the team we fielded. Is there, please, a possibility there’s a savior waiting in the wings?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:42 PM

They are all Republicans first. Expect to be disappointed, regardless of who the nominee is. The best we can hope for is he is not the second coming of Herbert Hoover.

rickv404 on December 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM

No one can argue that Coolidge wasn’t conservative but he wasn’t perfect either. the Kellog Briand pact which outlawed war was Barackishly naive.

He also sounded Obamaesque when he said “The government of the United States is a device for maintaining in perpetuity the rights of the people, with the ultimate extinction of all privileged classes.”

Also “No nation ever had an army large enough to guarantee it against attack in time of peace, or ensure it of victory in time of war.”

who is more conservative is an interesting subject for debate but we have to remember that we are picking somebody for the job of president not high priest of conservatism.

oznerola on December 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Coulter talks out of both sides of her mouth on Romney and Newt…she says conservatives want purity and that’s why we don’t like Romney, but then she tells us Newt is not pure as a conservative or in his personal life.

She sees no contradiction in that.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Newt is the Pied Piper of today’s Republicans, as BHO was to the Democrats in 2008.
(And no…Romney doesn’t play the flute for me either!)

KOOLAID2 on December 17, 2011 at 9:45 PM

They are all Republicans first. Expect to be disappointed, regardless of who the nominee is. The best we can hope for is he is not the second coming of Herbert Hoover.

rickv404 on December 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Maybe that’s the problem. Politicians of all stripes gobble. That’s all they know to do.

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:47 PM

I think Gingrich is guilty of triangulation and pandering to moderates, but a benign Stalin? Geez.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 9:47 PM

I dont think I can tolerate reading and hearing more negative news about Newt, no one is defending him on the right…

evergreenland on December 17, 2011 at 9:20 PM

How many ensconced and well paid pundits on the right would become almost irrelevant and some of their past “deep thoughts” on things seem dumb?
Like race hustlers and victim hand wringers advocates..solving the problem puts you out of business.

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 9:47 PM

And it’s really not true that the things you don’t say can’t hurt you.

Case in point the vaunted Karl Rove, the brain trust of the George Bush Presidency, argued not to stand up and defend. To not rebut the accusations of incompetence and illegalities from the left such that the well was so poisoned no Republican could win after Bush.
A shameful period in American history that has done irrevocable harm to our country.

That and the wild spending spree by Republicans after they drummed Newt from the Speakership.
Newt knows where the bodies are buried and which closets house the skeletons of the inside the beltway thieves, whores and charlatans. He must be defeated by them else he holds great power over them.

ConcealedKerry on December 17, 2011 at 9:49 PM

I’m not rich, but my wife and I make 200K and over 120K is gobbled up by some form of tax.

[...]

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Out of curiosity, could you do the breakdown on that 120K? Just curious how one gets to that number… even when I lived in California, I don’t think I was hit that hard.

zarathustra on December 17, 2011 at 9:50 PM

canopfor on December 17, 2011 at 8:50 PM
=============================================
So nice to us, and you can’t even vote here. (unless you vote donkey party)

platypus on December 17, 2011 at 8:59 PM

platypus:I’m a centre,all most far right Conservative,here in
Canada.I vote in the H/A Surveys,ugh,should keep this
on the down-low,I pilfer Michigans zippy code,to get in,
but,I never said that,*wink-wink*!:)

Oh,cannot stand the Jack*ss Party!!!

canopfor on December 17, 2011 at 9:51 PM

All these people that have been ripping Newt better hope and pray that Newt does not get the Republican nomination and win in 2012.Because if Newt wins it all. Pay back is going to be HELL for these people and you can take that to the bank. logman1 on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

What an absurd comment. As if Newt’s making a list. You sound like a Chicago thug.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 9:52 PM

We’re not getting Palin, Rubio… Reagan isn’t coming back from the dead, we’re just stuck with these two.

Newt is a horses ass, but 85% to 90% of what he says falls on the conservative side of things. He has a track record of at least trying to cuty back government.
He has baggage, but the baggage tends to be of the personal nature, not policy. He might have to explain what he did for Fanny and Freddy, or why he cheated on his wife, but he wont have to explain his backing of Obama-care lite. I expect him to slice and dice Barry in the debate… notice I said debate singular. I doubt The One will agree to a second.

Romney is more consistent than Newt. He’s consistently stated he doesn’t like to rock the boat, wants to ‘reach across the aisle’, ‘reach a consensus’, ect. Romney will be a pleasant technocrat. He wont challenge Harry Reid, Miss Nancy or any other Dem. He’ll give them half of what they want instead of all, this time. Imagine a prettier, better mannered McCain.

At this point I’ll go for the scatter shot jerk with the big brain and sharp tongue. On any given day the odds are good he will punch back at the people attacking him (progressives) instead of trying to find common ground.

Now if you’ll all excuse me, I’m going to go howl at the moon because once again I’m being forced to vote against the other guy instead of FOR someone. Please God, just once before I die, I want to vote FOR someone!

Boogeyman on December 17, 2011 at 9:58 PM

I think that we can all agree that Newt sucks. But Romney is much, much worse.

besser tot als rot on December 17, 2011 at 9:59 PM

“if you’re not a part of the solution, you’re a part of the problem.” John McClane, Die Hard

Why the f— would you defend this guy? The Fannie/Freddie debacle alone should be enough to make him a pariah – am I conversing w/ Newt’s mom?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

For one, the way you make those taxes go down and produce policy you want is to be pragmatic. You need to have a majority of Americans to want your policy to go through, hence pragmatism.

Two. I completely understand how you feel about taxes. I’m trying to start a small business at the moment and it sickens me that around 40% of my profit, regardless of what it is, is going to go in taxes.

Three. Newt’s not perfect. Neither is Romney, or Santorum, and definitely not Bachmann, who’s literally never actually accomplished anything conservative policy-wise. She’s basically Obama, but Republican, playing to the anti-Obamacare, Tea Party base with speeches, like he did with anti-war, but then deciding to run for president instead of actually accomplishing something, which Newt has done. Whether you want to believe it or not, actions speak louder than words. Yes, he took money, etc, but in terms of policy he actually accomplished, it was pretty conservative.

Yes, Fannie and Freddie was a debacle. He shouldn’t have been involved. That doesn’t make what he accomplished policy wise irrelevant.

There’s no perfect candidate out there. They all have major holes, because they’re all human and not conservative robots. Reagan did some liberal stuff as governor too, because that’s how you govern in America.

When we get to calling people like Newt totalitarian it’s crossing the line into absurdity. All the people running are pretty good Republicans.

We seem to have gotten to a point where people think we’re electing a king. WE’re not. We’re electing someone who’s going to have a conservative Congress and a Republican Senate, most likely. They don’t have to be perfect, they just have to beat Obama and be able to explain why we’re implementing the policies we are while defending against Democratic demagoguery like calling us totalitarians.

cpaulus on December 17, 2011 at 10:00 PM

No one can argue that Coolidge wasn’t conservative but he wasn’t perfect either. oznerola on December 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM

I really don’t understand this logic. We had a constitution that limited the federal government’s power greatly and emphasized states rights and individual liberty. Was it inevitable that we arrive where we are now? This has not been a zero sum game, the pendulum has swung mostly in only one direction – sometimes slowly (w/ Reagan who, lets not forget, gave us amnsety I and allowed the federal budget to explode) and sometimes quickly (Obama/Carter). Are you sure we have reached the end of big goverment’s limits? It can’t get worse if we keep electing the Romney/Gingrich/Bush/Clinton/Obama’s of the world? Are you not worried you will wake up one morning and realize you should have drawn line in the sand sooner?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:00 PM

“A house divided against itself cannot survive”….(just saw that on a Ben Stiller movie) :)

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:02 PM

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:00 PM

..and your solution is?….

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

How many ensconced and well paid pundits on the right would become almost irrelevant and some of their past “deep thoughts” on things seem dumb?
Like race hustlers and victim hand wringers advocates..solving the problem puts you out of business. Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Newtonians are starting to sound like Obamatons. Newt would provide endless material for pundits with one zany pronouncement after another. Romney would be too busy fixing things to provide material for their columns. You have it exactly backwards. There must be other reasons they are rejecting this visionary.

And if you think any politician is going to solve the problems and put the pundits out of business you have the mentality of a 12 year old.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Little late to the game, just now got to check my news today. But it’s funny you should bring up the Calvin Coolidge reference, Tina.

As “hotgas” for as long as I’ve been reading(years, just got to sign up finally at the first recent registration), has always seemed to be full of anti-pauliacs and thoroughly oppossed to legitimizing the idea of a Ron Paul presidency. To be honest, I agree with it. I’m in that very “big tent” of folks who find about 1/2 of what Ron Paul says to be great, needed, and beneficial, and the other 1/2 bats**t crazy, to say nothing of his pork and newsletter baggage.

But that being said, while paulistians claim with a straight face that he’s the glorious incarnation of Thomas Jefferson, I’ve always turned around and told them, “No, if Paul is like any former President, it’s Calvin Coolidge”. Of course, most of them are just all hot to trot at having been just woken up politically and assume they know everything, but have no idea about Calvin Coolidge so it goes right over their heads.

But nonetheless, compare their stances on business, centralized banking, the economy, and the role of government(essentially that it should do as little as is feasibly possible and leaving the rest to the market, the people, and human nature to decide. I feel as though that anyone who did so objectively would probably see the same similarities between their policies that I did.

Not so sure about Coolidge’s foreign policy, but I’d venture a pretty good bet they don’t differ to extraordinarily on that either in a cumulative sense if not on a case by case basis.

I’m not absolutely dead set against a Paul presidency, but I surely ain’t seeking it out. Just curious, since I always say a close similarity between Coolidge/Paul, how far the notion of “we need another Coolidge”(not quoting the story, just the idea)goes? To me Paul is far and away closer to him than any of the other losers standing on the stage, minus Coolidge’s speaking and privacy quirks, which were unique to him, and which none of them possess.

But if that’s what we need, why not chose Paul? Is it merely that, while policy wise their are many parrallels, it’s simply the messenger’s style, not the delivery? Or is it because we’re legitimately afraid he might go too far beyond the already drastic measures that need to be taken at present moment and make things exponentially worse? Or is truly needing another Calvin Coolidge just a half thought out brainstorm and not a truly studied position?

Cause if another Coolidge is what you want, Ron Paul seems to be your man that will get you closest.

Thanks all! Just happy to be a part. :)

Genuine on December 17, 2011 at 10:06 PM

WE NEED A CONSERVATIVE.

+1000 to you, madam.

predator on December 17, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Yeah? Well perhaps you should have been doing something more than posting comments on HA.

NoStoppingUs on December 17, 2011 at 10:08 PM

I really don’t understand this logic. We had a constitution that limited the federal government’s power greatly and emphasized states rights and individual liberty. Was it inevitable that we arrive where we are now?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Former close friend and staffer of Ron Paul says yes, it really was inevitable.

gryphon202 on December 17, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Enough already. I’m voting for Michelle Bachmann in the primaries because her positions are the most conservative and aligned with my views. I’ll vote for the Republican nominee in the general. Simple enough.

Meat Fighter on December 17, 2011 at 10:13 PM

He speaks the truth. Newt is unelectable.

rubberneck on December 17, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Newtonians are starting to sound like Obamatons.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

How so?
What specifics are you comparing?

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:17 PM

All these people that have been ripping Newt better hope and pray that Newt does not get the Republican nomination and win in 2012.Because if Newt wins it all. Pay back is going to be HELL for these people and you can take that to the bank.

logman1 on December 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Anyone who doesn’t appear on the enemies list of a government corrupt enough to have an enemies list isn’t doing it right.

troyriser_gopftw on December 17, 2011 at 10:18 PM

I got to think that a country that voted for Obama and Bill Clinton would vote for a benign Stalinist like Newtie poo.

Benign means harmless right? Obama and Slick Willie are closer to the real deal.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:20 PM

Newt Gingrich “in a benign sense … is a totalitarian,” says Mark Steyn

There is no such thing and never will be. But then Steyn surly knows that.

Newt Gingrich has “solutions to stuff most of us didn’t know were problems.

[Gingrichian] politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and then misapplying the wrong remedies. (Groucho)

VorDaj on December 17, 2011 at 10:20 PM

I’ll vote for the Republican nominee in the general. Simple enough.

Meat Fighter on December 17, 2011 at 10:13 PM

Yup.

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:23 PM

The media and establishment Republicans with their tactics of personal destruction of candidates not of their choosing is ridiculous and manipulative. I am a contrarian voter. In the general I’ll vote for ABO.

Cindy Munford on December 17, 2011 at 9:31 PM

I suspect this sentiment is shared by more out there than the Establishment could ever imagine. The last thing such people comprehend is the simple “contrarian” impulse, or the will NOT to follow their brilliant and better-than-thou dictates. Beyond this, they seem incredibly ignorant of the defiant and fed-up forces roiling around in the conservative culture.

These people are in for some shattering blows to their “established” presumptions.

rrpjr on December 17, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Man, I never thought I would say this, but I feel sorry for Newt now. He’s getting the Palin treatment by some of these pundits like George Will and the National Review editors.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:25 PM

First of all, Gingrich did not say that FDR was the greatest
president…in like “Evah!”.

Secondly, we do want our presidents to speak – only, we want
them to say something – tell us the facts clearly and truthfully
so we citizen/tax payers can know what we as a country are
doing with an international perspective and domestically, what
the hell are we spending our tax dollars on? Are regulations
helping or hurting? What about drilling for oil domestically?
What about illegals? We need to know. That calls for talking
to us, not at us.

Amjean on December 17, 2011 at 10:25 PM

Yeah? Well perhaps you should have been doing something more than posting comments on HA.

NoStoppingUs on December 17, 2011 at 10:08 PM

How do you know what he/she is doing in their spare time?
What’s your beef?

balkanmom on December 17, 2011 at 10:26 PM

Just to play devil’s advocate here, don’t we want a president who is a problem solver? If Gingirch just wants to solve problems, real or imaginary, does that really make him a benign Stalinist? Or just misguided on some things?

Engineers are by definition hired to solve problems. Are they benign Stalinists?

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Was it inevitable that we arrive where we are now?

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:00 PM

No. Of course not. When we were shamed into questioning traditional values he 60′s/70′s by a bunch of pathetic OWS’ers of the time and failed to see the con, we were well on the way to doom.

The kicker is falling for such idiotic dribble preached in the most idiotic way by such a bunch of fools.

Other than that type of thing…no, it wasn’t inevitable imo.

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:29 PM

It seems like mostly what presidents do is talk.

I don’t know even Coolidge could follow his own advice as a president.

How are you going to push an agenda if you never say anything?

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:30 PM

Genuine on December 17, 2011 at 10:06 PM

This.

8 weight on December 17, 2011 at 10:30 PM

Newt, we want you to push for a repeal Obamacare, but can you do it without talking.

Thanks.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:33 PM

Newtie poo,

Just post your agenda on Post It notes and have your staff deliver it to Congress.

Thanks.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:34 PM

values he 60′s/70′s

= in the

My cursor is faulty,highlighting and deleting without me purposely highlighting anything. Gak

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Newtonians are starting to sound like Obamatons. Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

How so?
What specifics are you comparing?
Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:17 PM

Here so. Look familiar? Newt is so brilliant, he’s going to solve all of our problems and put the pundits out of business. And that’s why they are lining up against him. Good grief. Is he going to pay our rent and buy our gas as well?

How many ensconced and well paid pundits on the right would become almost irrelevant and some of their past “deep thoughts” on things seem dumb?
Like race hustlers and victim hand wringers advocates..solving the problem puts you out of business.Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:35 PM

I’m not rich, but my wife and I make 200K and over 120K is gobbled up by some form of tax.

Out of curiosity, could you do the breakdown on that 120K? Just curious how one gets to that number… even when I lived in California, I don’t think I was hit that hard.

zarathustra on December 17, 2011 at 9:50 PM

We Directly Pay:

40,000 federal income tax
13,000 state income tax
4,000 Tolls
3,000 Sales tax
2,000 Fuel Taxes
13,000 property taxes
$$$$$ capital gains taxes, electricity taxes, phone taxes…

But the biggest taxes are the hidden taxes. Food, clothing, merchandise prices are largely set by taxes that merchants, truck drivers, et al. have to pay, which are in turn passed on to the consumer.

And I didn’t include FICA, although it will be means tested by the time I’m ready to collect.

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Newt,

I could support you if you never talked.

Thanks man.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:37 PM

National Review, Steyn, Coulter, Haley, Bachmann, etc.etc. shilling for Massachusetts liberal Romney……Pathetic! !!

kingsmill on December 17, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Cause if another Coolidge is what you want, Ron Paul seems to be your man that will get you closest.

Thanks all! Just happy to be a part. :)

Genuine on December 17, 2011 at 10:06 PM

….but Ron Paul is nuts. Everybody knows that. Did Coolidge have that problem?

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:40 PM

Who knows, Coolidge obviously never had to say anything.

Dr. Tesla on December 17, 2011 at 10:41 PM

..and your solution is?….

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM

I think we have to find a candidate who is clear on the principles that this country was founded on and keep running him/her out there until the majority are forced to elect a real (name irrelevant).

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Look familiar? Newt is so brilliant, he’s going to solve all of our problems and put the pundits out of business. And that’s why they are lining up against him. Good grief. Is he going to pay our rent and buy our gas as well?

No..not really.
Obama was sold as something completly different, someone who was going to “heal the Earth”..and “lower the sea levels” etc. A “lightworker” functioning on a whole different level.

Newt is basically saying.”Tried that..it was bullsheet. Lets try denutting some of this government oversight” etc.

I have no idea how you jumped from your firts comment obout pundits to claiming that it would be no supruse if Newt offered to pay everyones basic bills.
How DID you get there?

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:48 PM

First of all, Gingrich did not say that FDR was the greatest
president…in like “Evah!”.

Amjean on December 17, 2011 at 10:25 PM

No, just the greatest of the 20th century, when FDR was the worst of the 20th century. Reagan was the best. Again FDR, the worst.

VorDaj on December 17, 2011 at 10:50 PM

I think we have to find a candidate who is clear on the principles that this country was founded on and keep running him/her out there until the majority are forced to elect a real (name irrelevant).

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:47 PM

How much time you think we have for that?

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:51 PM

I suspect this sentiment is shared by more out there than the Establishment could ever imagine. The last thing such people comprehend is the simple “contrarian” impulse, or the will NOT to follow their brilliant and better-than-thou dictates. Beyond this, they seem incredibly ignorant of the defiant and fed-up forces roiling around in the conservative culture.

These people are in for some shattering blows to their “established” presumptions.

rrpjr on December 17, 2011 at 10:24 PM

You have your opinion. The establishment has theirs. Are they supposed to stifle themselves when they don’t agree with you? They can rise to the top but if they don’t agree with the rrpjr’s of this world they should just STFU. Is that your absurd position? Why should they care what you think? And why are you trying to destroy the American way.

The establishment has as much right to their opinion as you have to yours. In the case of Gingrich, the establishment, which knows him much better than you do, is largely correct. IMNSHOA.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:52 PM

I really don’t understand this logic. We had a constitution that limited the federal government’s power greatly and emphasized states rights and individual liberty. Was it inevitable that we arrive where we are now?

Former close friend and staffer of Ron Paul says yes, it really was inevitable.

gryphon202 on December 17, 2011 at 10:09 PM

more’s the pity

noeastern on December 17, 2011 at 10:52 PM

National Review, Steyn, Coulter, Haley, Bachmann, etc.etc. shilling for Massachusetts liberal Romney……Pathetic! !!

plus the rotarians,mels clam shack,Ikea,MR.clean,Barney Rubble,ED’s haberdashers,Knights of columbus,Harrys Pork Pies,Luigi’s pizzaria,and assorted fish fry stores.

gerry-moderate republican-mittbott-looking for something

gerrym51 on December 17, 2011 at 10:55 PM

National Review, Steyn, Coulter, Haley, Bachmann, etc.etc. shilling for Massachusetts liberal Romney……Pathetic! !! kingsmill on December 17, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Hot Airheads shilling for Freddie Mac Gingrich. Worse than pathetic. You must love being lied to kingsmill.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:56 PM

the establishment, which knows him much better than you do, is largely correct. IMNSHOA.

Basilsbest on December 17, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Is it possible that this branch of the “establishment” has an agenda..or do you simply assume that they are correct and their recommendations are in the best interest of “the people”?

Mimzey on December 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4