In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Newt Gingrich Takes it to the Establishment

I want to let you all know about a piece I did that is running today in Politico, “Newt Gingrich vs. The Republican Establishment.”

The article analyzes some of the reasons the base has been supportive of Gingrich and is willing to ignore his departures from conservatism and his occasional nutty proposals. Here’s a sample to give you an idea:

The grass-roots conservatives, tea partiers, evangelicals and the like who compose the base have had it with the establishment. The base is not only angry at President Barack Obama. The base wants to eat its own.

It was nice, polite Republicans, like Romney, who colluded with Democrats in expanding the federal government and who piled up the $15 trillion debt that now threatens to destroy the country. It was upstanding members of the GOP who added a new Medicare entitlement without paying for it, who created new agencies and wove myriad regulations to govern the lives of regular folk.

The base wants someone who is not polite, who is not conventional, who has the potential to grasp the established order in Washington by its cuff links and rip out its entrails.

I hope you’ll take a look.


44 thoughts on “Newt Gingrich Takes it to the Establishment”

  1. Another great piece Keith.
    I have been reading articles over the past week that communicate the same thing. Your piece is one of the best of those I’ve read as it gives a all around perspective.
    I for one am sick and tired of the “establishment’, if it be democrat or republican. I feel that this is just one of the many items that caused the Tea party to come forth. This is further proof that even the “establishment” within the republican party doesn’t get it.
    Our government needs to change course and in a huge way. I’m not talking about the “hope and changie” thing emporer Barry talks about, but massive change to the core of our system.
    Thanks agin for the piece, it is well written and covers the issue.

  2. Well, you nailed my feelings Keith. I’m as angry at George W. Bush as the democrats pretend to be. The establishment republicans are as much to blame for our current situation as Obama’s failed presidency. Progressivism is lawless whether from the right or the left. George Bush was not a smart president, and Obama doubled-down on stupid.

    1. That’s a little harsh. At least GWB was a decent, America loving president who truly respected our troops and our exceptionalism as opposed to The Communist who is a liar and a fraud and the very picture of Dorian Gray.

        1. Beginning with FDR, haven’t they all? Bottom line…until the taxpayers wake up and take ownership of the fact that it is OUR money being spent on all the foolishness and not some phony “government revenue” from something the government is supposedly producing, we will be at the mercy of greedy politicians and presidents who must leave a legacy to prove their relevance. Taxes should be funneled from the states to the federal government, not the other way around.

          1. Yes, they pretty much all did except when Gingrich ran the House, but Bush and Obama were/ are spenders on steroids. Anyway, I’m on your side. All the best.

  3. Keith; Thanks for letting us know. Otherwise, I would NEVER go to Politico. Their complicity in the “Journ-O-List” of 2008 was enough for me to stop even going there and I told them so.

  4. Newt is certainly tapping into the frustration of voters who are mad as hell and don’t want to take it anymore. His “moon coloney” is no more ridiculous than Obama’s promises of unicorns and rainbows.

    JFK was laughed at he when he promised to put a man on the moon :)

  5. Great article Keith. I think that the conservative base and any clear minded independant (liberals are a lost cause) recognizes that our government has strayed way off course. I liken it to when you cut a pattern and continually use each subsequent cut out to make the next one. It doesn’t take long before what you are making doesn’t even resemble the first. I would hate to take this from the pitiful OWS crowd, but as a nation we need to start a movement to Occupy America. Hopefully we will see the Tea Party start to voice our desires and bring attention to the core values again and stress smaller government and reduced spending. Keep up the good work.

  6. In Virginia I have been given Mitt and lunatic Ron Paul on the ballot. No write-ins allowed.

    Vote Newt in Florida —- annoy a liberal, establishment moron!

    1. I’d vote for Ron Paul just to annoy the process. It’s another way to let them know we’re not happy with romney being shoved down our throats.

        1. That would be delicious irony. The establishment pulls strings to give their guy a sure win in Virginia, and Ron Paul upsets the apple cart. I doubt Mark Levin would vote for Paul because of all the harassment he has received from his supporters, but it would send a loud message to the establishment.

  7. Fantastic article Keith. You really captured the mood of a good many of us out in flyover country. Every election since I can remember the establishment has anointed the Republican nominee…until Reagan. Never thought I would say this, but Newt is the one I’ve been waiting for…at least since Sarah Palin decided not to run.

    Been doing a lot of research on Newt’s time in congress, since I wasn’t very politically active back then. He was a mover and a shaker. In May, 1989 he filed ethics complaints against the Democrat Speaker of the House, Jim Wright. Those complaints resulted in Wright’s resignation from congress. In my opinion, that is the primary reason the establishment despises Newt and the primary reason ethics charges were brought against him when he was speaker. He was Palinized before Sarah was. Newt knows everything there is to know about the establishment because he was a part of it. His commitment to stay in the race until the convention only reinforces my opinion that he is the one. Rick Santorum is a good conservative, but he’s not catching fire. I hope he follows Herman Cain’s lead and supports Newt when he does drop out.

  8. Amen to all you’ve written in your article “Newt v. the Establishment.” I remember well those days from 1994 on, when people like Bob Dole, one of those “polite” establishment Republicans actually shut down the Contract With America, because they all thought Newt was gaining too much power. Dole himself, long bought and paid for by the Establishments of both parties, was afraid Gingrich would outshine him for his “turn” at running for the Presidency. Frankly, the country was better off with Clinton in the White House than it ever would have been with Dole! Romney is a well-dressed, well coiffed liar and cheat. He must not be President. Period.

  9. Nice polite Republicans LIKE Romney does not mean it WAS Romney–isn’t this the basis for a syllogism…? I suppose a bombthrower and gadfly would be a contrast–but I would rather have an administrator.

  10. The upheaval election of 2010 was the forerunner of the anti-establisment attitude that’s apparent today in the Repub primary. While the MSM pooh-poohed the results as a momentary insanity inflamed by tea party extremists, it was an forewarning that the electorate does not want to go where the established pols in Washington are taking our country.

    It’s not just the Repub base that wants a meaningful change, but Dems, like me, have joined in the electorate revolution. Not every Dem supports the progressive, radical agenda of the current President and every poll shows that there are Dems willing to make slashing changes to the political makeup of their own party.
    The D.C. establishment of both parties don’t represent the mood or wants of the people. When candidate Obama proposed the “hope and change” in Washington, the people were hoping that the change was to eliminate the corrupt, influence peddling, and destructive way that Congress operated.

    1. “When candidate Obama proposed the “hope and change” in Washington, the people were hoping that the change was to eliminate the corrupt, influence peddling, and destructive way that Congress operated.”

      And fix the economy too, not saddle us with yet another entitlement program. Obama spinned the people’s mandate to fit his Marxist agenda.

    2. Hope and change were never defined, that way everybody was free to project onto it whatever they wanted it to be. Slick marketing, if you ask me. “Buy our product, it does everything!” but never saying what “everything” actually is. Dems and independants, I hope, are not going to get snookered again. After 3 years we can see what “change” meant, and I don’t think a lot of people like it.

      1. We’re getting the same tactic with “fairness” and “equality”, but perceptive Americans, based on Obama’s past obfuscation, recognize this as a massive centralized government, tyranny, and serfdom. Obama is counting on being able to fool the people twice.

  11. MT for re-redistribution

    Here’s a thought in a nutshell. Voters keep preferring candidates who promise to lower taxes, and have been somewhat successful. However, feds just say ‘Fine, lower your silly taxes, we’ll just borrow money and continue, business as usual.” Stop spending money! The taxpayers, who are stuck with the repayment with interest, never gave anyone permission to borrow. 15 Trillion, holy cow!! STOP STOP STOP

  12. Thanks everyone, I’m glad many of you seemed to like this piece.

    Part of the inspiration for it comes from reading your comments and otherwise hearing from you, because it gives me a direct line to thinking outside Washington. I really hear how frustrated you are and how what you wanted more than anything was someone who stood on principles, who wasn’t part of the Washington group think, because this is the only person who could reverse the problems both Republicans and Democrats have caused.

    People here in Washington – including the Republican establishment – are so used to doing things a certain way that any notion of shaking up the order of things really scares them. They imagine that Republicans outside Washington are crazy. But because I have a direct line to the thinking outside the Beltway through all of you, I feel I can better understand the rationale for the votes, positions, and feelings of people who are strangers to the rest of Washington.

  13. HI KEITH,

    You really hit the nail on the head, as they say. That is why we will be voting for Newt, warts and all. We are so tired of the go along, get along RINOS.
    We donate only to Tea Parties, not to the republicsn party. Also we listen to Rush, who general agrees with us. We live on the west coast, and have had enough of go along get along union loving Moonbeam Brown.

  14. As usual, a well-written article, but I respectfully disagree with Keith’s take on both Gingrich’s strengths and Romney’s weaknesses. My take, for what it’s worth, is that Gingrich isn’t as pure as he might seem and Romney isn’t as bad as he’s perceived. More importantly, the only question at hand is “which man is the most electable?”

    I know that Gingrich fans will scream when they read this, but Gingrich is simply not going to be embraced by most Americans, EVEN IF HE IS RIGHT on most issues. He’s simply too polarizing and the deck is stacked against a major change agent thanks to the pervasive entitlement mentality that we have allowed the Government to fund. Therefore, Gingrich’s candidacy is moot and we need to move onto determining who can beat Obama and doing our best to influence their positions (and more importantly, their actions).

    I’m not a big fan of Romney, but I think it’s more important to beat Obama than it is to let Gingrich run and lose. Four more years of the present administration will pretty much tank us.

      1. Touche. You’ve got a point, but I think that in the minds of most Americans, Romney is a much better candidate than McCain. Sadly, perception still rules.

        1. Perhaps the voters believe that Romney is better than McCain, but if Santorum and Paul, or Gingrich and Paul were to drop out of the race, wouldn’t Romney be losing in Florida? The same concerns were leveled against Reagan in 1980. Anyway, all the best to you, and us.

  15. Pingback: Et-Tu Right Wing Blogosphere? « Nice Deb

  16. Brilliant composition Keith. A must read, 4 stars. Two thumbs up.
    Had to access Webster’s (apostasies, imprimatur) to fully comprehend.
    Another great choice of words : “rip out its entrails”.
    You are making a difference Mr. Koffler.

  17. Pingback: Et-Tu Right Wing Blogosphere? | FavStocks

  18. Keith, you’d be surprised at the number of Hillary supporters who went full-on conservative after the 2008 election thievery by Obama and the media. They were beyond angry then and they’re even madder now to see the same disgusting behavior happening in the Republican party. They will stay home in November if Romney is the nominee, just as conservatives stayed home in droves when McCain was. It’s the only form of protest left.

Comments are closed.