David Brody

CBN News Chief Political Correspondent

Buy David's book
"The Teavangelicals"

Watch The Brody File TV Show Video

Read David's Bio

E-mail David Brody

Subscribe RSS

TwitterTwitter

Facebook Facebook

Add to Technorati Favorites

Subscribe to this Feed

View All CBN News Blogs

View All CBN Blogs


The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich


George Will’s column (below) blasting Newt Gingrich is a perfect example of how the conservative intellectual elite community is totally disconnected from what is happening on the ground in these early states. Maybe George should hit the campaign trail more often.

While Will makes the intellectual case against Gingrich he is missing the intangible ingredient that is only found in places like Iowa and elsewhere. The secret sauce is simply this: Voters are in a mood for someone to take on President Obama with serious ideas, a bunch of boldness, and a heavy dose of hubris. Mix it all together and you get the rise of Newt Gingrich.

George Will is a respected voice in the conservative community but he doesn’t represent the sentiment of the voter in Ottumwa, Iowa.

George Will’s column is below:

George F. Will: Between Romney and Gingrich, the choice is neither

Republicans are more conservative than at any time since their 1980 dismay about another floundering president. They are more ideologically homogenous than ever in 156 years of competing for the presidency. They anticipated choosing between Mitt Romney, a conservative of convenience, and a conviction politician to his right. The choice, however, could be between Romney and the least conservative candidate, Newt Gingrich.

Romney’s main objection to contemporary Washington seems to be that he is not administering it. God has 10 commandments, Woodrow Wilson had 14 points, Heinz had 57 varieties, but Romney’s economic platform has 59 planks — 56 more than necessary if you have low taxes, free trade, and fewer regulatory burdens. Still, his conservatism-as-managerialism would be a marked improvement upon today’s bewildered liberalism.

Gingrich, however, embodies the vanity and rapacity that make modern Washington repulsive. And there is his anti-conservative confidence that he has a comprehensive explanation of, and plan to perfect, everything.

Granted, his grandiose rhetoric celebrating his “transformative” self is entertaining: Recently he compared his revival of his campaign to Sam Walton’s and Ray Kroc’s creations of Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, two of America’s largest private-sector employers. There is almost artistic vulgarity in Gingrich’s unrepented role as a hired larynx for interests profiting from such government follies as ethanol and cheap mortgages. His Olympian sense of exemption from standards and logic allowed him, fresh from pocketing $1.6 million from Freddie Mac (for services as a “historian”), to say “if you want to put people in jail,” look at “the politicians who profited from” Washington’s environment.

His temperament — intellectual hubris distilled — makes him blown about by gusts of enthusiasm for intellectual fads, from 1990s futurism to “Lean Six Sigma” today. On election eve 1994, he said a disturbed South Carolina mother drowning her children “vividly reminds” Americans “how sick the society is getting, and how much we need to change things. … The only way you get change is to vote Republican.” Compare this grotesque opportunism — tarted up as sociology — with his devious recasting of it in a letter to the Nov. 18, 1994, Wall Street Journal. And remember his recent swoon over the theory that “Kenyan, anti-colonial” thinking explains Barack Obama.

Gingrich, who would have made a marvelous Marxist, believes everything is related to everything else and only he understands how. Conservatism, in contrast, is both cause and effect of modesty about understanding society’s complexities, controlling its trajectory and improving upon its spontaneous order. Conservatism inoculates against the hubristic volatility that Gingrich exemplifies and Genesis deplores: “Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel.”

Obama is running as Harry Truman did in 1948, against Congress, but Republicans need not supply the real key to Truman’s success — Tom Dewey. Confident that Truman was unelectable, Republicans nominated New York’s chilly governor, whose virtues of experience and steadiness were vitiated by one fact: Voters disliked him. Before settling for Romney, conservatives should reconsider two candidates who stumbled early on.

Rick Perry (disclosure: my wife Mari Will advises him) has been disappointing in debates. They test nothing pertinent to presidential duties but have become absurdly important. Perry’s political assets remain his Texas record and Southwestern zest for disliking Washington and Wall Street simultaneously and equally.

Jon Huntsman inexplicably chose to debut as the Republican for people who rather dislike Republicans, but his program is the most conservative. He endorses Paul Ryan’s budget and entitlement reforms. (Gingrich denounced Ryan’s Medicare reform as “right-wing social engineering.”) Huntsman would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Gingrich’s benefactor). Huntsman would end double taxation on investment by eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends. (Romney would eliminate them only for people earning less than $200,000, who currently pay just 9.3 percent of them.)

Huntsman’s thorough opposition to corporate welfare includes farm subsidies. (Romney has justified them as national security measures — food security, somehow threatened. Gingrich says opponents of ethanol subsidies are “big city” people hostile to farmers.) Huntsman considers No Child Left Behind, the semi-nationalization of primary and secondary education, “an unmitigated disaster.” (Romney and Gingrich support it. Gingrich has endorsed a national curriculum.) Between Ron Paul’s isolationism and the faintly variant bellicosities of the other six candidates stands Huntsman’s conservative foreign policy, skeptically nuanced about America’s need or ability to control many distant developments.

Romney might not be a Dewey. Gingrich might stop being (as Churchill said of John Foster Dulles) a bull who carries his own china shop around with him. But both are too risky to anoint today.

Print     Email to a Friend    posted on Monday, December 05, 2011 11:42 AM



Comments on this post

# RE: The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich

The country is deeply divided. While none of the candidates are perfect the present administration is more scarier than Romney or Newt. Do we choose democracy or socialism? Your choice America
Left by KellieC on Dec 05, 2011 12:15 PM

# RE: The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich

When did Republican politics become such a joke? Aren't there any serious R's out there anymore? If you honestly believe in the Republican party are you at all ashamed of what's going on? I mean really, you can't tell me that honest conservati­ves aren't appalled at this. This country needs a balance of progressiv­e and conservati­ve leaders to be effective. All one or the other would be a disaster. So, come on R's get your act together. Give us some statesmen to work with. Please
Left by Popi on Dec 05, 2011 1:13 PM

# RE: The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich

The first time George Will said something that I agree in 40 years. “It is an amazingly efficient candidacy in that in embodies everything disagreeab­le about modern Washington­,” Will (whose wife consults for Rick Perry) said, running through a long list of problems he had with Gingrich. He also mocked Gingrich's explanatio­n that Freddie Mac had given him over a million dollars to be a "historian­" for the company. "He's not a historian!­" Will snapped. Later, he piled on more, saying Gingrich was guilty of "absurd rhetorical grandiosit­y."
Then I find out his wife works for Perry. His record as a political shill is unbroken. Will can't spell Integrity. He has Snobby Arrogance down to a "T" Party.
Left by Popi on Dec 05, 2011 2:04 PM

# RE: The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich

The republican base has been thrashing around trying to find someone to love besides Romney. But as soon as they get to know the flavor of the month, they reject him/her. There IS no one to believe in for them. ALL their candidates are seriously flawed. I give Newt 2 months at most, then back to the bottom of the polls.

Obama 2012


ReplyReply AllMove...craigeditpicsRegentsermons
Left by Popi on Dec 05, 2011 2:12 PM

# RE: The Secret Sauce of Newt Gingrich

What next?
A debate chaired by G W Bush?
Karl Rove?
Or what about Grover Linquist
Left by Popi on Dec 06, 2011 5:55 PM