Newt Gingrich is GOP’s Frankenstein monster come to life

The panic of the GOP’s Washington establishment has become, well, entertaining. The conservative movement that they have designed and programmed so carefully is in the process of going rogue on them, and that rogue has a name: Newt Gingrich.

But they have brought this on themselves. He is their creation.

If you indoctrinate your members to believe that compromise equates to defeat — if that becomes a core principle in your movement’s identity — how can you demand they compromise by accepting Mitt Romney as their nominee? Is that not defeat on the most important decision the party can make?

If you tell them that being Republican requires obedience to every single tenet of Republican doctrine — George Will this week noted that the party is “more ideologically homogenous than ever in 156 years of competing for the presidency” — how can you sell them on a candidate who is so transparently insincere in embracing that doctrine? Isn’t that a betrayal? (Gingrich is equally insincere; he’s just better at hiding it.)

And if you have nurtured your base on the red meat of anger and resentment, building an elaborate media infrastructure to generate fresh outrage to feed upon, you have prepared the way for a demagogic leader with a genius for that style of politics. With his intellectual veneer and flair for the outrageous, Gingrich doesn’t merely throw the crowd red meat, he throws them Kobe beef, broiled to perfection.

Meanwhile, Romney offers soy burgers. Go ahead, eat it. It’s good for you.

And this is the tough part: For years, you have imbued your voter base with a deep distrust of the media, the establishment and the elites, to the point that distrust is now programmed into the movement’s DNA. The harsher the media attack, the more enthusiastically the party faithful now rallies behind its target.

That trait has proved useful, producing a party base that to a large degree is immune to outside influence. But in these circumstances, what mechanisms do you use to convince the base that Gingrich would be a disaster to the party and to the country? How do you reach them? You can’t use the mainstream media, and moderate voices preaching caution from Washington simply have no impact. In fact, they confirm the false image of Gingrich as a fellow outsider.

Newt understands that dynamic very well, having helped to create it. He has made an ostentatious point of refusing to attack his fellow Republicans, saying he will not participate in a media conspiracy to divide the party. It is a wise response, perfectly attuned to the mindset of the base, and you can expect to see him offer it repeatedly in tonight’s GOP debate from Iowa.

In fact, tonight’s debate (broadcast at 9 p.m. on ABC) is likely to be the most important of the party’s two dozen or so forums, because it comes at a critical time. Unless Gingrich self-destructs, and soon, the party establishment and intelligentsia will have to spend the next few months trying to discredit him while shoving Romney down the throat of a GOP base that gags at the thought. And maybe it’s what’s left of my naivete, but I have to think that patriotism is also playing a role in that desperation. The party elite know Gingrich; they understand that proposing to put Newt in position to be president of the United States would, in its own way, be as grossly irresponsible as putting someone like Sarah Palin in that role.

They just don’t know how to convince the rest of the party of that fact, because it requires unlearning so much of what they’ve been told to believe.

– Jay Bookman

781 comments Add your comment

TC

December 10th, 2011
11:55 am

“The party elite know Gingrich; they understand that proposing to put Newt in position to be president of the United States would, in its own way, be as grossly irresponsible as putting someone like Sarah Palin in that role” – or Obama.

Gojoh Mailee

December 10th, 2011
11:57 am

TC: No, just no. Obama is a far more responsible person than Palin.

Bella Napoli

December 10th, 2011
12:00 pm

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:07 pm

The cons want the newt.

So be it.

Jake

December 10th, 2011
12:07 pm

Is “or Obama” the wingnut version of “in bed”?

Beverly Fraud

December 10th, 2011
12:08 pm

Interesting, Jay and no doubt accurate.

It indeed is going to take some finesse from the GOP leadership to distance themselves from Newt, while remaining unified in their message.

Jay, I dare say, it does remind one of what the AJC editorial board had to do, as far as deconstructing the myth of Beverly Hall, after having spent the better part of a decade being part and parcel of corporate Atlanta in building it up. It couldn’t have been easy, (please note, I’ve always maintained you were at the forefront of your peers in expressing “buyer’s remorse.”)

Can’t help but notice the parallels in each case. But I’ll leave it up to others to decide if they themselves see the parallels.

Kamchak

December 10th, 2011
12:09 pm

The party elite know Gingrich; they understand that proposing to put Newt in position to be president of the United States would, in its own way, be as grossly irresponsible as putting someone like Sarah Palin in that role.

Unless, of course, occupying the Oval Office at this time is not in their plans.

If they were truly serious about taking the White House, candidates like Palin and Gingrich wouldn’t even be considered.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 10th, 2011
12:10 pm

The party elite know Gingrich; they understand that proposing to put Newt in position to be president of the United States would, in its own way, be as grossly irresponsible as putting someone like Sarah Palin in that role.

Given their indoctrine and whining, they do not know how to be responsible. They are forever being victims of themselves

carlosgvv

December 10th, 2011
12:13 pm

The Republicans have learned well the lessons of propaganda, brainwashing and lying taught to them by their corporate sponsors in the Advertising Industry. They have been so successful that many, if not most, Republican voters have the mind-set of cult followers. Newt knows this and will play it for all it is worth. De-programming the Republican electorate will only probably occur when a truly disasterous Republican President is elected and proceeds to ruin the Country. Needless to say, he or she will have to be far worse than George W. Bush, if that’s possible.

tc

December 10th, 2011
12:15 pm

Gingrich or Palin would be far better for the country than Obama

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:19 pm

Funny how the cons want the man that invented the mandate to buy crappy health insurance but want to repeal that health care mandate.

All of the newt’s ideas are horrible ideas but the cons want him anyway.

Bring on the newt.

Four more years.

No Big Deal

December 10th, 2011
12:22 pm

You an say what you want about Newt, but I seem to recall that when he became Speaker of the House, he delivered on almost every ‘Contract’ item he promised (compare that to Obama’s record) and Congress worked pretty well with the Clinton Administration (compare that to today’s ship of fools – on both sides of the aisle), which all let to a (so-called) balanced budget and some pretty good years economically.

Tommy

December 10th, 2011
12:22 pm

Palin is a great idea… if you want to see civil war and genocide on American soil.

Jay

December 10th, 2011
12:24 pm

No Big Deal, you left out the part in which his own party then ran him out of leadership because he was so unstable, unpredictable and dictatorial.

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:25 pm

He shut down government con and it was President Clinton that gave us peace and prosperity.

Don’t worry con, if you run the newt we will revisit President Clinton’s great leadership this cycle.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:30 pm

What we really need is a guy to come into the presidency with zero executive experience, zero meaningful private sector experience, but lots of aggitating experience as a community organizer clamoring for more free shiite. Oops. Never mind. Looks like we already have that.

Say what you will about Newt’s personal issues but the fact of the matter is that as speaker he forced Clinton into welfare reform and something called a balanced budget. Just a fact libs. Think we’ll ever get a balanced budget under this clown in office? Bwahahahahahahahaahah!

As for personal issues are the Dems really going to bring that up with Newt? Especially after the various affairs, alleged rape, and seduction of a 22 year old intern by Clinton not to mention perjury and disbarrment? Libs can’t possibly be that stupid. Or can they???

Jay

December 10th, 2011
12:30 pm

Not to mention unethical.

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:31 pm

Basically, the President can just run ads on what the gop said about the newt when he was run out of office.

If you want to make it that easy for the reelection of President Obama, I can live with that.

DeBee Corley

December 10th, 2011
12:31 pm

Newt is bad because Newt is bad?
I don’t remember it that way. I remember a balanced budget when he was Speaker of the House.

I read that members of the House of Representatives hated him. Gee, you think? Crashing their irresponsible spending party,

Interesting to read the responses. Just like the NY Times responses.

Frank Whittaker

December 10th, 2011
12:31 pm

It’s no wonder Republicans are angry and bitter; there has been a complete failure of leadership in the GOP. If Gingrich gets the nomination I will be surprised if the RNC lifts a finger in the general election.

Beverly Fraud

December 10th, 2011
12:33 pm

Ah, so Jay IS around. Was I wrong in drawing the parallels?

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:33 pm

“Not to mention unethical.”

Obama, Holder, Biden, Hillary, Corzine, Blago, Frank……

All unethical.

Again, Jay is the most pointless person employed by the AJC.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 10th, 2011
12:33 pm

Gingrich or Palin would be far better for the country than Obama

This message brought to you by “Comedy Writers Looking for More Material in America” We reeeeallly want Perry see but we may have to settle for Newt. Of course Tina is still hoping for Palin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLQrMqog8Fk&feature=player_embedded#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLQrMqog8Fk&feature=player_embedded#!

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:34 pm

“The panic of the GOP’s Washington establishment has become, well, entertaining.”

Again, nothing about the falling dollar, 15 trillion dollar debt, 40% approval rating of Obozo etc..

Jay, it’s time for your old a$$ to retire to Granny Godzilla’s nursing home.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:34 pm

LSU

Hit with 5 years probation.

'Selective memory' by GetaLife

December 10th, 2011
12:34 pm

So, getalife, when things are going well, and a Democrat is President, the President gets credit. But, when things are going horribly wrong, and a Democrat is President, it’s the former president’s fault?

Just asking you to clarify, and point out that it was Reagan that brought down the Soviet Union, which allowed Clinton to use the former military budget to expand social programs and with pressure from a Republican (Newt) led to a balanced budget.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 10th, 2011
12:35 pm

Newt’s rise among the wingnuts is based on one big factor – that he can out debate Obama.

Are they ever in for a surprise.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:37 pm

Choice is simple really.

Newt would bring if not a balanced or close to balanced budget at least some semblance of fiscal sanity.

Obama???- More economic stagnation, earth shattering debt accumulation, and strangling regulation of the economy. Give him enough time and he will make the U.S. look like another Democratic sheethole- Detroit.

Give Newt enough time and he will make the U.S. look like another Republican stronghold- namely Texas which according the federal reserve has generated nearly 40% of all new jobs in the past 10 years in the U.S.

Just the facts libs.

So how many more millions have we added to the national debt in the last 5 minutes?

Jay

December 10th, 2011
12:37 pm

Talking, if I were so pointless, you wouldn’t feel compelled to come here and repeatedly claim that I was pointless.

Because that would be, well, pointless.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:37 pm

“It’s no wonder Republicans are angry and bitter”

Bitter: See OWS scumbags who rape, crap on cop cars and destroy public property. OHHHHH, and now the DNC wants them banned from the DNC convention.

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:37 pm

Afghanistan brought the USSR down.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:38 pm

“Talking, if I were so pointless, you wouldn’t feel compelled to come here and repeatedly claim that I was pointless.”

Maybe you should do a copy and paste job on what I wrote, Jay.

Again, pointless.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 10th, 2011
12:39 pm

Newt voted AGAINST Clinton’s budget balancing acts.

And the idea that Reagan ended the Cold War is ludicrous. But I give him credit for not starting a disastrous war like Dumbya did.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:39 pm

“Afghanistan brought the USSR down.”

Yeah, and eskimos killed Hitler.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:39 pm

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck,

I’m always humored by folks who think that ridiculing one ethnic group is socially acceptable but ridiculing others is politically incorrect. Hypocrisy much ma’am?

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
12:40 pm

“And the idea that Reagan ended the Cold War is ludicrous.”

Tell that to the USSR.

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:40 pm

Stop lying about LSU.

After we beat Bama again, there is no doubt who is the best college football team in our country.

Geaux Tigers!

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
12:42 pm

Don’t you just love Gingrichs Middle East ‘piece’ plan :-)

Gotta love a teacher who hasn’t learned shyte

Martin the Calvinist

December 10th, 2011
12:42 pm

You can’t trust politicians who vote themselves raises on a yearly basis, allow themselves to insider trading, vote themselves out of social security and gave themselves retirement after 8 years of “service”, spend like crazy giving friends free federal dollars. That is the mantra of both the Republican and Democrat party. I get it that the republicans are hypocrites. What I don’t get is that the Democrats are just as guilty and they get a free pass by their supporters.

No Big Deal

December 10th, 2011
12:43 pm

Jay, I think the reason Newt resigned (after being re-elected by large margins) was because he couldn’t, in good faith, attempt to over-see the impeachment of President Clinton’s lying under oath (it was only about sex…), a felony by the way, while his past had some less than ethical dealings with other women.

I can also recall that Newt repaying the US taxpayers for this ethics hearing costs by borrowing money (with interest rate) from a friend (Dole) as opposed to Clinton setting up donor accounts (funded mostly by sequentially numbered money orders from China) to pay for his defense costs.

Granted, the Washington establishment doesn’t like him, but how much longer can we let the Washington insiders – from either party – continue to run the USA into the grounds?? How many freshman politicians head to DC with the dream of changing the game only to be run out of town with their tail between their legs?

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 10th, 2011
12:43 pm

Thulsa – I am a Jon Stewart, George Carlin, and Bill Maher fan Every group is fair game.

Besides, its Boortz I am ridiculing.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:44 pm

Not a neal boortz,

I guess you’re not much for history are ya? Unless of course its lib revisionist history. Wrong on both counts. When getalife, another lib, blames the Repubs for shutting down govt when newt was there what in the hell do you think the purpose of that was? It was to get Clinton serious about a balanced budget and slow down govt spending.

I’m always willing to help out libs and their distorted sense of history.

“When the previous fiscal year ended on September 30, 1995, the president and the Republican-controlled Congress had not passed a budget. A majority of Congress members and the House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, had promised to slow the rate of government spending; however, this conflicted with the president’s objectives for education, the environment, Medicare, and public health.[1] According to Clinton’s autobiography, their differences resulted from differing estimates of economic growth, medical inflation, and anticipated revenues.[2]

When Clinton refused to cut the budget in the way Republicans wanted, Gingrich threatened to refuse to raise the debt limit, which would have caused the United States Treasury to suspend funding other portions of the government to avoid putting the country in default.[2]

Gingrich and the incoming Republican majority’s promise to slow the rate of government spending conflicted with the president’s agenda for Medicare, education, the environment and public health, leading to a temporary shutdown of the U.S. federal government.[3]“- Wikipedia

Don't Forget

December 10th, 2011
12:45 pm

Gingrich is a great example of “careful what you wish for”. As president he will do serious harm to the republican brand. He would make both Obama and W look good by comparison. The notion that we need anybody but Obama may damage both the country and the R’s.

JamVet

December 10th, 2011
12:45 pm

Newt will win.

But only if the Dems also go back in their time machine and nominate Dick Gephardt.

The pompous blowhard was ridiculous then and is an even bigger buffoon now. Not to mention serial adulterer and misanthrope.

The latest shining example of his vast historical credentials?

A major league foot in mouth episode regarding Palestine.

Take a hint, fake conservatives, we Hebes do not trust nor like your little jerks and their faux love for Israel.

You’ll be lucky to get 15% of the American Jewish vote this time around.

Selah…

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:47 pm

So who really was key in balancing the budget during the Clinton years???

“Clinton said Republican amendments would strip the U.S. Treasury of its ability to dip into federal trust funds to avoid a borrowing crisis. Republican amendments would have limited appeals by death-row inmates, made it harder to issue health, safety and environmental regulations,* and would have committed the president to a seven-year balanced budge*t”- wikipedia

Aaaaaand I repeat “would have committed the president to a seven- year balanced budget”. Just the facts ma’am. Just the facts.

getalife

December 10th, 2011
12:48 pm

Martin,

Progressives have been purging corrupt dems for a decade so they do not get a free pass.

corporate media gives the gop a free pass on blocking recovery for this election.

All the unpatriotic and unAmerican actions done by the gop “to get Obama” have failed.

Jay

December 10th, 2011
12:48 pm

NBD, proposing Freddie Mac’s $1.6 million in-house “historian” as a Washington outsider is quite the stretch, to say the least. But it does testify to Newt’s ability to obscure his own history.

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
12:48 pm

Too bad that Newt didn’t have to run for Congress in the district that he last represented (when it was more balanced).

Very few would have voted for the carpetbagger from west Georgia (who he previously represented).

Frank Whittaker

December 10th, 2011
12:50 pm

That the GOP is afraid of offending The Birthers (fergawdsakes) tells you everything you need to know about the state of The Republican Party. They’ll be lucky if Frankenewt becomes the nominee and not somebody even freakier.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 10th, 2011
12:52 pm

Nope, Thulsa.

Clinton passed an act which CUT $500 billion from the budget and added more in tax revenue. No Republican voted for it (it raised the top end tax rate to 39.6%). Numbers show that act did more to create the 90s surplus than anything else.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-2671462/The-success-of-the-1993.html

When Newt starts lying in the debate Obama should hit him with this!

TaxPayer

December 10th, 2011
12:52 pm

Newt, Newt, Newt. :lol:

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
12:53 pm

I am a Jon Stewart, George Carlin, and Bill Maher fan Every group is fair game.

I went to a George Carlin performance at the fox years back when W was running for re-election I think it was. May have been the first time though. Anyway I had to put up with listening to Carlin go into a diatribe in the middle of his routine about why we shouldn’t vote for W and the Republicans. Just another celebrity left wing hack in my book. And his routine that night really wasn’t that funny anyway.

And if you think that Maher and Stewart are equally critical of the left as they are of the right then you probably would think that Kim Il Sung is as caring on human rights as the Dalai Lama.

No Big Deal

December 10th, 2011
12:53 pm

Common Sense: “Too bad that Newt didn’t have to run for Congress in the district that he last represented”

You mean like Hilary Clinton, former Arkansas resident before spending 8 years in DC, running in New York, or Obama’s man Rahm Emanuel, after living for several years in DC, running in Chicago??

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
12:56 pm

No Big Deal – yep exactly like them :-)

No Big Deal

December 10th, 2011
12:57 pm

Redneck “Clinton passed an act which CUT $500 billion from the budget and added more in tax revenue. No Republican voted for it (it raised the top end tax rate to 39.6%). Numbers show that act did more to create the 90s surplus than anything else.”

SO, using your logic, we can return to a surplus budget if we simply increase tax rates to, say, 45%? What about 50%? Hell, let’s make it 90% – we;ll have one hell of a surplus then, won’t we?!?

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:00 pm

Clinton was more a practical pragmatist than many other presidents.

Hell Ronald Reagan couldn’t pass the purity test now.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 10th, 2011
1:02 pm

NBD – that act cut spending MORE than any time in US history but only at a 1-1 ratio to tax increases.

Obama offered a 3-1 ratio. Its obvious the GOP is not serious about cutting the deficit since they said “NO”.

And Thulsa – we agree, Maher, Stewart, and Carlin are much tougher on conservatives.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
1:03 pm

“You’ll be lucky to get 15% of the American Jewish vote this time around.”

That’s fine. We’ll get the white vote, independent vote etc, race baiter.

Jay

December 10th, 2011
1:03 pm

No, NBD. 39.6 percent would be fine.

BTW, the same argument could be made in reverse about the Laffer argument: “Let’s just keep cutting taxes to zero, and we’ll be rolling in revenue.”

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:04 pm

No neal Boortz

It was a joint effort, although there was some conflict between the two sides, including a couple of government shutdowns. Clinton proposed to balance the budget all right, but his initial proposals delayed the hard cuts and the actual balancing until he would have been out of office, in 2002. Newt and the Republican controlled Congress forced his hand and called for more immediate cuts. The result, after some contentious negotiations was a balanced budget for the last couple of years of his tenure. There were annual surpluses for, I think, three years, but none of them were large enough to actually reduce the national debt, only pay off a larger chunk of the annual interest. One large issue was that many of the cuts were to infrastructure related items, so things like highways, bridges, dams and such suffered some neglect as a result

Paulo977

December 10th, 2011
1:05 pm

carlosgvv
……Republican voters have the mind-set of cult followers. Newt knows this and will play it for all it is worth. De-programming the Republican electorate will only probably occur when a truly disasterous Republican President is elected and proceeds to ruin the Country.
_________________________________

Cult followers are really really difficult to deprogram….They would rather stick with their noses cut off!!

JamVet

December 10th, 2011
1:05 pm

Wasn’t it last year there was all this nonsense about the new “young rising stars in the GOP”?

But to look at this absurd slate of candidates, where the hell are they all?

Face it cons, recycled garbage is still garbage.

And Newt stinks to high heaven.

And even you GOP First, America Second rubes know it…

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:08 pm

There is a way for many on the right to lower your taxes.

Just claim 8 dependants and don’t file.

On top of that you get to join the 47% that don’t pay income taxes and eventually you will also get 3 hots and a cot to go along with it.

Get started the New Year approaches.

:-)

Don't Forget

December 10th, 2011
1:10 pm

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
1:10 pm

“But to look at this absurd slate of candidates, where the hell are they all?”

Laughing at you.

JamVet

December 10th, 2011
1:11 pm

Newt get the independent vote??

Huge chortle and guffaw.

You’ll get the same vote you always get, Meat. And like it.

The enraged, violence-addicted groups in Dixie and in the backwaters of the Midwest and in Idaho.

And that’s about it…

BTW, Arnold Einsteen, Judaism is not a race…

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:11 pm

Jay

December 10th, 2011
1:03 pm
No, NBD. 39.6 percent would be fine.

BTW, the same argument could be made in reverse about the Laffer argument: “Let’s just keep cutting taxes to zero, and we’ll be rolling in revenue.”

Jay,

Neither is reasonable. We can’t just cut taxes to zero or even as low as 10% because obviously we do need tax revenue to run govt. But neither do we need high marginal tax rates with top tax rates at 70% or crazy numbers like that which simply inhibit risk taking activity.

From what I’ve seen on the IRS tables and other sources I think the cap. gains tax rate needs to be raised to 18-19% from the current 15% to raise more revenue. But one thing we’ve never had on here is an honest discussion as to at what level we should have marginal income tax rates, especially the top marginal rates. In other words at roughly what level do we maximize revenue to the treasury without affecting investor behavior and risk taking entrprenurial behavior. Don’t know if I’ve ever seen that blog topic on you or anyone else’s column.

Don't Forget

December 10th, 2011
1:17 pm

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:11 pm

good post

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:19 pm

Common Sense isn’t very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:08 pm
“There is a way for many on the right to lower your taxes.

Just claim 8 dependants and don’t file.”

I think the magic # is 9 dependents. But people catch on pretty quick and illegal aliens now know how to skirt taxes. If you ever talk to anyone who works at a poultry plant or carpet mill then they’ll tell you the illegals do claim 9, 16, crazy numbers of dependents to avoid paying taxes. If you’re using a stolen or fictitious ss number then what do you care?

Knew a guy who was a sawmill manager in South Georgia. They had an all immigrant workforce and everyone had fictitious ss numbers. Anyway, they would submit these numbers and 2 months later the IRS would return 250 letters saying the SS #s were no good. So like clockwork the workers would all just resubmit info with new SS #s and the cycle would start all over again. You would think the IRS would catch on but they didn’t.

Jay

December 10th, 2011
1:20 pm

Thulsa, I agree with every point of your 1:11.

The only problem is, economics doesn’t give us the kind of answers that you seek, re: the optimal “Goldilocks” marginal tax rate. There’s no question, for example, that the Laffer curve theory is correct. It was standard theory long before Laffer ever drew it on a cocktail napkin.

But again, we don’t know where we are on that curve at any given moment in time.

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:24 pm

TD – I agree with you in many ways, but the problem is many in Congress (right and left) have lost their reasoning powers.

They pander to their party and refuse to do what’s BEST for the many. We are all in this together.
Many people would lost their jobs since the downturn around 2000 (pre-Bush) were productive tax paying members and now are being vilified if they can’t get a decent job in the current economy.

Until corporations realize that the people create demand and quit shipping jobs offshore we will continue to have problems as a nation.

Common Sense isn't very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:27 pm

E-verify is a joke. Any valid purchased SSN will show up as valid to e-verify (even if the person is dead).

Companies don’t even try to match the names.

Soothsayer

December 10th, 2011
1:28 pm

Absolutely great statement, Jay! Great read.

It comes as no surprise to anyone except the brainwashed, lunatic-fringe Right that they are now at logical end-point of over a decade of Fright-Wing talk radio, hatred, mass-indoctrination and fear-mongering.

It’s too late now to go back to the drawing board. The Lush-Bots have taken on a life of their own — a Dr. Frankenstein’s monster come to life.

How else can you explain the fact that an overstuffed windbag blowhard like Newt Gingrich is the only logical choice for the nomination?

I fear that if the Republicans and their lunatic Fright-Wing fringe somehow manage to win the election, we will be living under martial law in a totalitarian, fascist government within the first term.

Erwin's cat

December 10th, 2011
1:32 pm

Newt ought to be sponsored by “Foster Grant”

Great Example

December 10th, 2011
1:34 pm

Congrats, Soothsayer – Your comment “It comes as no surprise to anyone except the brainwashed, lunatic-fringe Right… ” sums up exactly what is wrong with our country. 90% of its citizens have their heads up their politically-motivated (aka ignorant) asses so far that they are not willing to consider the other side’s opinion regardless of its consequences.

And the remaining 10% change their mind ever 2 years. It’s only a matter of time until the mighty USA joins the ranks of the Romans. I only hope it’s not in my life (although it’s looking more and more like it every day).

Tommy Maddox

December 10th, 2011
1:39 pm

“Progressives have been purging corrupt dems for a decade so they do not get a free pass.”

And robots are reading my mail…

Don't Forget

December 10th, 2011
1:40 pm

Newt has two modes: attack and run away seriously wounded. That should make for an interesting foreign policy.

Jay

December 10th, 2011
1:46 pm

I see that this column has now been reposted by our friends at Free Republic. The commentary is interesting: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2818649/posts

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

December 10th, 2011
1:47 pm

Why are these white men so angry? Did they not get nurtured when they were young? Now that they are older are they not getting the love they so DESPARATELY craved?

Republican women have you been NEGLIGENT IN YOUR WOMANLY DUTIES?

Why are your men SO ANGRY? MMMMMmmmmmmm!

A loved and well taken care of man is a happy man who will not be so ANGRY!

Obama is a happy man who loves his wife. :)

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

December 10th, 2011
1:48 pm

Newt is the leader of ANGRY WHITE MEN!

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

December 10th, 2011
1:49 pm

Newt has so much baggage he would bring down an airplaine. :)

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

December 10th, 2011
1:50 pm

If Newt were elected president he would find a way to CHEAT on the country. :)

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
1:50 pm

“The enraged, violence-addicted groups in Dixie and in the backwaters of the Midwest and in Idaho.”

You must be talking about OWS scum, race baiter. Also, I never said anything about Judaism being a race. You should spend more time reading and less time ranting.

Now go back to occupying a gas station.

Soothsayer

December 10th, 2011
1:50 pm

An interesting component of the current atmosphere of angst in America is collective amnesia. Everyone seems to forget:

1. There was a very expensive war. Whether the war was in fact “necessary” so as to Keep America Safe, is debatable. But putting that to one side, it most certainly did not generate a return on investment in the form of looting and pillaging…which always used to be the main justification for going to war in the old days, and that in the cold light of debt servitude, arguably remains the only fiscally-responsible reason for going to war…ever…so long as you win!

2. The war was “financed” by tax cuts, or in other words by debt.

3. There was a credit crunch caused by a brilliant theory which had proved beyond all reasonable doubt that (1) economic prosperity could be achieved by increasing the level of home-ownership, and (2) the best way to do that was to use the GSE’s to help to harness the magical “free-market” powers of securitization to make mountains of credit available so that the new home owners paid twice as much for their new houses than they would have in normal circumstances. There is a widespread consensus nowadays that there was what in a rare moment of lucidity Alan Greenspan called, “a flaw”, in that theory.

4. When the “flaw” was recognized, well there was a bit of consternation, because banks discovered that what they had previously thought were AAA assets, which they had bought on margins of up to 30:1 turned out to be worth a lot less than the somewhat optimistic valuations that they had used to calculate their bonuses…back in the days when there was a widespread belief that house prices would go up forever.

5. And so the “lender of last resort” stepped in, which in a fiat monetary system is the standard Plan B response when “flaws” in brilliant socio-economic theories are discovered. But even so tax revenues plummeted, particularly since they had previously been bolstered by taking a share of the “profits” that the banks had declared so as to maximize their bonuses, and thus the Federal Government had to borrow heavily to honor prior commitments, i.e. to pay for the fiscal sins of the past.

6. On top of all that, oil prices went through the roof, and since Americans don’t pay any significant tax to finance their divine right to waste imported oil, that caused even more problems.

7. Then the hyperventilating hyper-inflation doomsayers all came streaming out of the wood-work, screaming blue-murder that the end of the world was happening, and that the whole problem was caused by entitlements, unionized-teachers, illegal immigrants, and closet homosexuals in the Military; and if the “money-printing” didn’t stop This Instant then America would never be Great ever-again. That was a superb theory; although three years later there are reasons to suspect there might have been a “flaw” in that one too.

Fast forward to now:

These days everyone says that President Obama lost the plot.

They conveniently forget that he got left a stinking pile of garbage to clean up. Of course that’s the American way, all show and no trousers; everyone remembers a great party (vaguely), but no one remembers the black boy that comes-by in the morning to sweep up the mess. Except for the vocal few who wake up from their hangovers and berate the lazy bum for not working faster…so that they can all start partying again.

This is a great short read with an interesting chart if you’re interested. I couldn’t help posting most of the text because it is so very true.

Kamchak

December 10th, 2011
1:50 pm

Nearly 80 comments, and still no, “you Dems are afraid of Newt ’cause he’s gonna wipe the floor with Obama/clean Obama’s clock in a debate.”

You guys are slipping.

Just sayin’.

What are you talking about?

December 10th, 2011
1:51 pm

Obama has two modes.

1: Agitate
2: Blame others

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:51 pm

Jay,

I have an economics degree so in some agreement with you for once. Economics is an imprecise science and there is no set number or goldilocks rate because economics is a dynamic and not static picture. Same as in studying the capital gains taxes. You have to approximate at where you are in the economy at any point in time and therefore the appropriate level of taxation.

But in what I’ve studied and accounting for differences in macro conditions it seems to me that you can peg a number or range that’s reasonable in approximation and that range should be adhered to and adjusted given macro conditions. I see no reason as to why a general range of optimal marginal tax rates that deliver the most GDP while maximizing federal tax revenues while adjusting for macro conditions can’t be established given the mountain of economic data that we have.

The reason I suspect has more to do with politics then people wanting to know the real truth about what the appropriate taxation levels should be.

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

December 10th, 2011
1:53 pm

@Jake December 10th, 2011 12:07 pm – Is “or Obama” the wingnut version of “in bed”?

*********************************************

Maybe if some of you were “IN BED” maybe you would not be SO ANGRY. :)

Vinny

December 10th, 2011
1:54 pm

Newt would be far better than the incompetent Marxist that presides in the White house now.

Jm

December 10th, 2011
1:55 pm

Bye bye occupy Boston

stands for decibels

December 10th, 2011
1:55 pm

our friends at Free Republic.

yowsa, I haven’t been to Freeperville in ages. I see its clunky interface is still every bit as ugly as its content.

Vinny

December 10th, 2011
1:55 pm

And Obama is the leader of angry black racists!

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
1:58 pm

Common Sense isn’t very Common

December 10th, 2011
1:24 pm
TD – I agree with you in many ways, but the problem is many in Congress (right and left) have lost their reasoning powers.

Common sense I can’t argue with you there. I think they’ve all lost touch with reality and their reasoning powers in particular.

In regards to outsourcing this has been going on for decades now. As the world gets smaller and smaller through globalization we are going to continue to lose jobs. And more and more I think we will continue to lose IT and technical jobs to cheaper but very competent Indian labor. In the long run we will all be better off according to the law of comparative advantage but in the short run there’s definitely going to be some pain as workers, even highly skilled workers, are replaced. Happened to the textile workers over the last 20 years and next up are programmers and others.

stands for decibels

December 10th, 2011
1:59 pm

He is their creation.

he’s an “invented” person, a-yup.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
2:00 pm

Kammy,

Ask and you shall receive. Happy to oblige you!

Aint no doubt. Newt will destroy Obama in a debate. And I think you guys know that.

Soothsayer

December 10th, 2011
2:01 pm

Doomy: maybe you could regale us with a brief discourse on Chicago School economics and monetarism a la Milton Friedman and how that’s working out today.

Soothsayer

December 10th, 2011
2:03 pm

“In the long run we will all be better off according to the law of comparative advantage but in the short run there’s definitely going to be some pain as workers, even highly skilled workers, are replaced.”

Doomy: comparative advantage has nothing to do with it. What we have is absolute advantage of low labor costs and nothing more.

Thulsa Doom

December 10th, 2011
2:04 pm

The GOP is the Party of Angry White Men In Need of Some TLC!

Looks like we have a race baiter alert. Nothing like a race hustler spewing all manner of hyperbole and rhetoric. Excuse me while I go pop some popcorn and sit down to watch his show.

Paul

December 10th, 2011
2:05 pm

Never before has anything so amusing made me so nauseous.

And, frankly, concerned for the future of this country.

Kamchak

December 10th, 2011
2:05 pm

An economist is just a person that will tell you why his last weeks predictions were wrong.