Gingrich the Outsider
Posted by Anthony Gregory on May 23, 2011
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House and establishment conservative, boasts that he is not a “Washington figure” and claims that he “will clearly be the most change-oriented, the most fundamental reform candidate in the race.”
Yes, this from the guy who was recently taken to the woodshed for his comments that Paul Ryan’s ridiculously moderate budget cut proposal was an example of dangerous “right-wing social engineering.”
This only demonstrates what is meant these days when someone is called a “Washington outsider.” Obama was supposed to be such a candidate, despite his record-busting campaign donations from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street powerhouses, his unequivocal support for the agenda of AIPAC and other establishment lobbying groups. But even Obama was a better example of an outsider than lifetime government employee John McCain, who laughably ran as a maverick in 2008, defending virtually every element of the Bush regime—the wars, the bailouts, the compassionate conservative welfare statism.
Will anyone take Gingrich seriously as he attempts to position himself as a change agent? Perhaps, but as cynical as I am, even I have my doubts. Perhaps a year or so ago, when Newt was a favorite of the Tea Party right, he may have somehow made Republican and independent voters forget his 1990s legacy of sellouts, graft, Clintonian compromise and fraud. But now, after he has weaseled his way through the scandal concerning his attack on the Paul Ryan budget plan, it’s hard to believe even the most myopic of conservative partisans will fail to see right through Gingrich’s McCainian makeover attempts, especially with all the other Republican hopefuls attempting to outflank him on fiscal conservatism (not a hard task; even many Democrats could do it successfully).
It is funny, however, that Gingrich would call himself the most “change-oriented” candidate and biggest reformer in the race. Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico, proposes balancing the budget by 2013, slashing entitlement spending across the board, ending America’s wars virtually overnight and decriminalizing marijuana. Texas Congressman Ron Paul goes even further, suggesting about a trillion dollar cut in defense-related spending (which would likely be the largest retraction of America’s warfare state since the end of the first World War), a legalization of all drugs at the federal level, an elimination of the income tax, an audit and eventual abolition of the Federal Reserve, radical reform of Social Security, an elimination of about half the federal Departments — including Energy, Education, and Homeland Security — and the restoration of all civil liberties lost in the wars against terrorism, drugs and every other nationally targeted boogeyman. Either one of these guys are certainly at least a bit more reform- and change-oriented than Newt Gingrich, although if we measure reform by how much it expands federal power, Newt wins the prize.
Now, some will counter that it is unfair to mention Ron Paul or even the more moderate Gary Johnson as bigger reformers than Newt, since they are not “serious” candidates, whatever that means. Of course, this just demonstrates the bankruptcy of American politics. What we have here is a situation where the media determine preemptively who the “serious” candidates are simply by reporting on them more. It is a self-fulfilling prophesy. If they wanted to keep Newt from climbing in the polls, they could probably do so easily by dismissing him as a fringe candidate, just as they do with those candidates who actually propose to do something different.
This would admittedly be somewhat difficult in his case. And why can he not be so easily dismissed? Because he is, in fact, an establishment figure. He is a Washington insider. He’s a regular on all the beltway shows. He’s a mascot of Official Republican Conservatism. And his recent comments about the Ryan plan reveals exactly how much of an insider he is. If the political spectrum ranged from Obama to Gingrich, there would hardly be room for anyone to stand in the middle.
It remains to be seen, however, if the ringleader of the 1990s Republican non-revolution can pull the wool over the eyes of his partisan comrades and if the media decide to play up his supposed credentials of seriousness or instead highlight his recent alienation from the Tea Party right. As with most other presidential elections, this one is being manufactured by the networks and organs of accepted opinion on the coasts. Will he be cast as a serious contender, or be looked over early on in favor of a more telegenic, believable character actor who can fill his niche in the presidential election plot? Only time will tell. But my money is on an incredulous audience. Belief can only be suspended so much, and there’s not enough makeup in all the green rooms to make Gingrich look like a genuine man of reform.
-
Vahamm
