Why Newt?

Romney Machine

A couple of weeks ago I was trying to figure out why the Tea party was going back to “Moon U-Newt” Gingrich after a quick fling with Santorum. It turned out the revelation from his wife that was supposed to end him wasn’t that sensational from a secular perspective: he wanted an “open marraige.” But since we already knew he had told his wife to just deal with it before, the only real difference is Newt wasn’t so much of an asshole that he also demanded his wife be faithful to him while he slept with other women. But I could see where she would think that would sink him with Christian conservatives: cheating on your wife is an easily forgivable sin while having an open marriage is openly adopting the same secular lifestyle Newt rampages against (when he isn’t making completely-prescient remarks about Saul Alinsky).

Turns out she was wrong. They don’t care. Which I’m not too surprised about. What I was surprised about was the standing ovation by the “values voters” of South Carolina for being appalled at being asked about it (skip to 3:35). Do Conservatives now believe only Liberal sex scandals should be covered by the media? I know a lot of them believe the King David/St. Augustine fallacy that sinful Christians can inspire their peons to be sinless, but even they know that only works if they keep it on the down-low. So I asked two conservatives why the Tea Party wants someone who:

1) is a Washington outsider,
2) believes the Republicans have been too pro-spending,
3) is against ObamaCare,
4) is a social conservative, and
5) pretends to believe that Fannie and Freddie caused the financial crisis


1) He’s a Washington insider who was reprimanded on ethics and fined $300,000 by an overwhelming 395-28 House vote. It was weird enough that Sarah Palin, the previous VP nominee, was considered a “Washington Outsider” even though she backed everything Tea Partiers hated about McCain, but at least she acted like an an “outsider” in that she didn’t know anything about Washington. Honestly, I thought that’s why they liked her, Bush and Perry: “folksy” stupidity is a plus to many voters. But Newt is the exact opposite of that: He acts like he knows everything.

2) He’s a “technocrat” who received more federal subsidies than any suburban county in the country, except Arlington Virginia, effectively part of the Federal Government, and Brevard County Florida, home of the Kennedy Space Center.

3) He was for insurance mandates for people who earn more than $75,000 a year

4) He was cheating on his wife while impeaching Clinton for the same thing, yet got a standing ovation for saying it was no one’s business. I thought only Democrats believed that, but Clinton never would have been elected if his cheating had come out before he became president.

5) He said Barney Frank should be arrested (apparently for unsuccessfully trying to regulate Fannie and Freddie against Republican opposition), yet received millions to push congress NOT to regulate Fannie and Freddie.

The Ron Paul supporter answered:

“Here’s the secret: He’s like Donald Trump in that people think he can and will take on the left-wing Media and their boy Obama…kick his ass in a debate make him look like shit for what he is doing to this country….all those other facts are second fiddle for now….but I don’t think it will last…he will fall back down!”

That makes sense. Despite all of Newt’s baggage, he is the best in the group at insulting people and his hate-filled swagger no doubt resonates with many the Tea Party faithful. And apparently their cynicism has risen to the point where they would elect Pol Pot as long as it meant he had the best chance of out-debating Obama. They do seem to be a wee bit unhinged, what with them killing cats and praying for Obama’s death and all.

The other answer seemed like a typical echo from within the Republican Bubble:

“The answer to your question is simple; Only one of 3 men will be our president. next year. Oboma, Romney or Newt. With Ronald Reagan being dead, that only leaves Newt as the last man standing.”

I replied that the Republicans had moved so far right that Obama was the closest to Reagan, which he found to be “a stretch of epic proportion.” I told him that was because he was thinking of the mythical Reagan. The historical Reagan did these:

1. Raised taxes 11 times when taxes were higher than today
2. Became the 1st president to create a deficit without a Depression or World War
3. Sold weapons to Muslim extremists in Iran
4. Increased welfare spending
5. “Cut and Ran” from Lebanon
6. Invented Cap and Trade
7. Raised the debt limit 18 TIMES
8. Granted amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens
9. Helped facilitate the Savings and Loan Crisis through deregulation
10. Started “Big Government” War on Drugs
11. Compromised with Democrats
12. Bailed out Social Security in 1983 after attempting to privatize it and set up a progressive taxation system to keep it funded into the future
13. Failed to deliver his promise to close the Departments of Energy and Education, then created a Dept. of Veteran Affairs that cost twice as much
14. Was first former union leader who became president and believed that “where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost”
15. Signed a bill to liberalize California’s abortion laws
16. Claimed to want a world “free of nuclear weapons,” something no Republican could say now
17. Continued funding al-Qaida after U.S.S.R. decision to surrender Afghanistan in order to put Gorbechev in a bad light, thereby instigating the battle that catapulted Bin Laden to his leadership position
18. Tripled the national debt

Here’s the famed Conservative Blog “Red State” that fully admits Reagan is the “Great RINO of American History.”

Here’s the Keynesian-hating “Von Mises Institute” attacking Reagan’s financial conservatism.

Santorum’s sudden return makes much more sense as the Tea Party favorite since polls show them to be the social conservative wing of the party. I guess it just took a while for them to find out he’s as much of a sexually repressed hypocrite as they are. He railed against Clinton for Kosovo, is still pissed off that the French sided with the U.N. in our unquestionably successful war in Iraq, was against Libya, but then said that Obama “had little to do with this triumph.” As Santorum said when getting bashed for supporting No Child Left Behind: “when you’re part of the team, sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader, and I made a mistake.” He’s the perfect candidate to lead the Tea Party to reducing the federal government into a Punanny State.

But David Frum likes him because at least he acknowledges there is a problem with the poor; never mind his solution is the same as everyone else’s: the Paul Ryan Plan. Frum did a great review on the Charles Murray book. Murray is the same guy who wrote the “The Bell Curve,” a bestseller among the intellectual racist circuit, such that there is such a thing, as a new study seems to show there isn’t. The book is about the deteriorating values of the working class. Kevin Drum adds an interesting anecdote about how teen pregnancy from the 60s to the 80s may have been linked to childhood exposure to leaded gasoline. Being a Neo-Con, Frum naturally hates Ron Paul and Julian Assange, and lately he’s also been critical of the Heritage Foundation and the contraception fight (“Call me out of touch, but campaigning hard against birth control doesnt seem to me a winning issue in 2012”).

Whether Santorum is able to beat Romney has a lot to do with whether he can pick up the rest of the votes from the Tea Party split. Yet ironically, the billionaire holding Newt’s puppet strings didn’t like him attacking Romney since he likes him, but he’s given Newt permission to attack Santorum all he wants. Not only is he going to throw away another million dollars on Newt, he actually flew the idea of putting another $10 million into his campaign. But hey, if it wastes the money of a rich GOP-supporter, I’m all for it.

I also got this in my email:

Joke on liberals

My response was:

Except Christianity: Yeah, Liberals totally hate 72% of themselves.

Unless it offends her: Tell that to Frank VanderSloot, Romney’s billionaire donor, who has caused Forbes, Mother Jones, and several private bloggers to remove news articles on ridiculous charges because of the threat of facing unlimited funded lawsuits. One blogger posted the lawyer’s letter was threatened with COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT after getting the letter copyrighted after the fact!

Religious Devotion to Apple: This is only shows complete ignorance of recent news. The Tea Party has been trying to claim his mantle while Republicans like Rush Limbaugh have devoted entire episodes to gushing praise for him as the model businessman, falsely claiming that he created tons of jobs in American when he didn’t. It’s liberal publications and t.v. shows that have just recently started looking into how we can live with ourselves getting our technology from Chinese slave labor camps where dozens of people are packed into rooms but not allowed to talk to one another and suicide attempts are so common that nets were installed on the outside

Steve Jobs

Protests the 1% Except Steve Jobs, Michael Moore, Movie Stars, or Millionaire Democratic Politicians: Unlike Jesus in the Synoptic gospels, Liberals do not criticize individuals solely for being rich, only when they use that money to help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Meanwhile, Conservatives make up excuses for the banks they bailed out but then go to annex and astroturf Ron Paul’s Tea Party the minute Obama spends less than a tenth of that money on the actual victims of the financial crisis (which even Ron Paul said: If you’re going to bail someone out, bail out the victims).

Except Conservative, straight white people: Celebrating diversity does not mean pretending to agree every opinion.

Hates Capitalism: Amazingly, the fight between Romney and Gingrich has opened up evidence that many Conservatives secretly acknowledge there is such a thing as vulture capitalism. Limbaugh observed recently, “Here we have capitalism being attacked by Republicans.” GOP strategist Frank Luntz told a group of Republican governors that the public thinks “capitalism is immoral. And if we’re seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we’ve got a problem.”

Surprisingly, I actually liked the State of the Union address. I didn’t even want to watch it but Candice dragged me in and I was shocked (in a good way) to find out that Obama had appointed Eric Schneiderman to a federal investigation of the mortgage crisis. Even Matt Taibbi seemed to be unusually semi-optimistic. Then Glenn Greenwald had to ruin it all by pointing out that Obama is targeting rescuers and funeral attendees.

It’s always a drag when even the most reasonable presidential candidate with a chance of winning is pro-murdering heroes and mourners.

This entry was posted in Politics by Jeff Q. Bookmark the permalink.

About Jeff Q

I live in New Orleans. I have a Bachelors in Computer Science and a Masters in English Literature. My interests include ancient history, religion, mythology, philosophy, and fantasy/sci-fi. My Twitter handle is @Bahumuth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.