by Deb Cupples | I don't understand why former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (who hasn't been in Congress since the last year of the last century) insists on grabbing a bull horn and bellowing about issues of national importance -- even when it's excruciatingly clear that he doesn't understand said issues.
Monday, the U.S. House voted down the amended Bush-Administration plan to funnel at least 350 billion tax dollars (possibly up to $700 billion) into pockets of Wall Street firms that had helped drive our nation's economy toward the cliff's edge.
During the few days before the vote, Mr. Gingrich railed against the bailout plan and handed out pitchforks to right wing voters, bloggers, and politicians.
Yes, this is the same Newt Gingrich who helped author the so-called "Contract with [corporate] America": the same Newt Gingrich who spent years fighting against sensible corporate regulation and accountability.
That's why I was so pleased to see Mr. Gingrich fight against the first bailout plan -- though his public statement sadly included claims that made Mr. Gingrich seem utterly unburdened by an understanding of the potential for abuse in our markets.
Though I mentioned Mr. Gingrich's lack of knowledge in a blog post, I didn't harp on it, because I was impressed by his newfound concern for us ordinary taxpayers.
Just two days before the House voted on the bailout bill, for example, Mr. Gingrich opined before God and everyone 1) that President Bush doesn't understand the economic crisis; and 2) that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (the ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, who'd helped come up with the first accountability-free bailout plan) should resign.
It was amazing: Mr. Gingrich was saying the same things as millions of his (and the Bush Administration's) harshest critics. If I'd been in a downtown Atlanta restaurant at the same time as Mr. Gingrich, I would have sent a bottle of Cristal to his table.
Two days after Mr. Gingrich's unexpectedly perceptive public statements -- on the very day that the House was poised to vote down the bailout bill -- Mr. Gingrich changed his tune, publicly saying "I would reluctantly and sadly vote for the bailout."
Clearly, Mr. Gingrich either 1) hadn't figured out why he opposed the bailout before trumpeting his opposition for all to hear; or 2) understood why but decided to sell out his principles for as-yet unidentified personal gain.
Naturally, my opinion of Mr. Gingrich snapped back to what it had been years ago: back when I learned that Mr Gingrich allowed the political party he led to persecute then-President Clinton for having an extra-marital affair after Mr. Gingrich had cheated on his cancer-stricken wife; back when I learned that Mr. Gingrich was giving what looked like political payoffs (at the taxpayers' expense) to people who'd donated piles of cash to Mr. Gingrich.
I understand that Mr. Gingrich has been a fixture in our nation's media over the past 15 years -- and the twisted pang of nostalgia that follows our media invoking of his name.
I understand that Mr. Gingrich (while in Congress and later as a commentator on Fox) developed an admirable talent for maintaining an authoritative tone while uttering nonsense and misleading millions of people about issues that face our nation.
But isn't it time for Mr. Gingrich to take a bow, head toward a sunset-drenched pasture, and enjoy the rest of his life?
Other Buck Naked Politics Posts:
* Did Bailout Really Cause Dow to Drop? Bailout Fans Say So.
* Failed Republican Tactic: Timing Problem with Anti-bailout Ad
* McCain Strategists Make Palin Seem Moronic Again
* Fed Pumps $630 Billion into Economy
* Senate Passes Bailout Bill, House Should Kill it & Go Back to Drawing Board
.
Comments