While Nancy Pelosi continues to warn Republicans not to nominate Newt Gingrich (which is being used by the Romney camp this week), the Republican establishment is doing a full court press against Gingrich. That has led to some curious moments like Ann Coulter denouncing Gingrich for “hotheaded arrogance”. However, the strangest came from Elliott Abrams who accused Gingrich of the greatest sin of a Republican. No it is not endorsing torture or promising to renew the Iraqi War or even wiping out the separation of church and state. It is the unspeakable act of criticizing Ronald Reagan. Reagan famously handed down the 11th Commandment “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” However, that is merely a venal not the mortal sin of violating the 12th Commandment, “Thou shalt not speak ill of Reagan.”
Republican leadership is calling out ranking establishment figures to question everything from Gingrich’s electability to his morality to secure the nomination for Romney. Elliott Abrams, however, shows how deep they are going in the GOP bench. You may recall Abrams from a little criminal affair called the Iran-Contra scandal. Abrams ultimately pleaded guilty to crimes of withholding information from Congress which included two years probation. He was then pardoned by President George H. W. Bush, in December 1992. Then on February 5, 1997, Abrams was censured by the D.C. Court of Appeals publicly for giving false testimony on three occasions before congressional committees. At the time, three judges wanted to not just impose the censure but to suspend him from practice.
As previously discussed in a column, many of these dark figures from the Reagan years were brought back into government by President George W. Bush, an early indication of the Administration’s approach to the rule of law. Abrams considers himself so rehabilitated in the public eye that he feels entirely comfortable in denouncing Gingrich for statements against Reagan that include criticism over . . . yes guessed it . . . Iran-Contra.
Abrams offers a rather cheerful account of his role, which led to his criminal plea. He accuses Gingrich of saying mean things about Reagan and “predicting that Reagan’s policies would fail, and in all of this he was dead wrong.” Of course, Iran-Contra was not exactly a roaring success.
Yet, Abrams notes that he and others were fighting “vicious criticism from leading Democrats — Ted Kennedy, Christopher Dodd, Jim Wright, Tip O’Neill, and many more — who used every trick in the book to stop Reagan by denying authorities and funds to these efforts.” You may recall that Congress limited funds to the Contras through the Boland Amendment. Abrams notes the Gingrich did in fact vote for the Administration, but said negative things about Reagan. His “best” example was on March 21, 1986.
“This was right in the middle of the fight over funding for the Nicaraguan contras; the money had been cut off by Congress in 1985, though Reagan got $100 million for this cause in 1986. Here is Gingrich: ‘Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing, and without a dramatic change in strategy will continue to fail. . . . President Reagan is clearly failing.’ Why? This was due partly to ‘his administration’s weak policies, which are inadequate and will ultimately fail’; partly to CIA, State, and Defense, which ‘have no strategies to defeat the empire.’ But of course ‘the burden of this failure frankly must be placed first on President Reagan.’ Our efforts against the Communists in the Third World were ‘pathetically incompetent,’ so those anti-Communist members of Congress who questioned the $100 million Reagan sought for the Nicaraguan ‘contra’ rebels ‘are fundamentally right.’
So, Gingrich is unacceptable because he criticized a criminal conspiracy that ultimately landed the Reagan administration into a quagmire of criminal investigations and convictions, including Abrams’ own admission of criminal conduct. This is a lot like a bank robber singling out a witness as unreliable and disrespectful for not remaining silent.
I previously called Abrams part of the Bush Bada Bing club – men who earned their bones by showing their willingness to violate the law. I am no fan of Gingrich, but this pile on is becoming truly Felliniesque.
Next I am waiting for James Watt to come out with his anti-Gingrich column on how Gingrich was not sufficiently supportive of his efforts to influence peddle at the Department of Housing and Urban Development — leaving to his own guilty plea.
It is hard to see how a Republican can purge himself of having spoken ill of the Gipper. The secret purging ceremony has only been witnessed by the Republican National Committee members. It involves the Souix ritual of having one’s pectoral muscles pierced and eagle’s talons are drawn through the wounds and tied to leather thongs from which the Republican hangs until purified. That may take a bit longer for Gingrich . . . at least until after the Florida primary.
Update: Other Republicans are now challenging Abrams on his account.
Source: National Review
My guess is he won’t get the nomination, but if he does he will be forced to pick Santorum. Christie is popular with the Corporatists in the party, but seen as too far “left” by the teabaggers. Romney is so disliked in his own party because they distrust his conservative credentials and will have to throw them Santorum as a sop.
As for Rubio, living in Florida I got to know of him via his time in the State Legislature. He’s a thoroughgoing Corporatist who will pander to any group to get power.
ACP7 – Marco Rubio has a great chance to deliver Florida/the South and more of the Hispanic vote. And a run for 2016 or 2020???
What do you all think?
Blouise:
my guess is he’ll want Chris Christie but since he’s a NJ politician the GOP will press him to pick someone like Santorum who’se more right leaning and while not having Christie’s charisma would appeal to the Tea Party without the baggage and polarization of Gingrich (well polarizing rhetoric, just not a polarizing past and hypocrisy).
The most dangerous IMO would be if he picked Rand Paul. They may try to appeal to some of his father’s libertarian fans who don’t realize that the son is far more conservative than the father, though they may agree on some domestic issues. Personally though I don’t see Rand running with Mittens as the right likes to call him. He probably realizes its a losing fight, and unlike Christie whose close friends with Romney, he wouldn’t want to tie his legacy to Romney and lose out at a chance to win the GOP nomination in the future if they lose the election.
LOL at the 12th commandment, but there is truth in comedy.
SwM,
Newt’s remarkable rise from the ashes and his forthcoming fall interrupted our funfest of speculation as to whom Romney will choose as a running mate.
Will he choose another crazy like McCain did?
@AY – To me, that’s one failure endorsing another failure. I wonder how much John and Teresa Kerry paid in taxes over the last several years? Per dollars earned, probably less than Warren Buffett’s secretary.
And while I’m not a Newtster; in all fairness, he was speaking of inner city job creation for students (why pay custodians $50K, when you can augment cleaning with student assistants), not workhouses for the poor. More productive than midnight basketball, I think.
The Dems had one-party rule from 88-90. Look where it got us. Lies (or at least unkept promises) from Obama, Pelosi, Reid. And trillions of dollars down the tubes. To paraphrase Sen. Everett Dirksen, “10 billion here, 10 billion there, pretty soon you’re talking about some money.”
It will come down to that one question… “Are you better off in 2012, than you were in 2008?” And for most wage-earners, that’s a resounding “NO!” From the 9-10% unemployed, a “HELL NO!”
Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
Fidel Castro: Republican candidates display ‘idiocy and ignorance’
The State Column | Staff | Thursday, January 26, 2012
Former Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro responded to the Republican presidential candidates comments about him earlier this week with an op-ed article in Cuban state media Thursday, Huffington Post reports.
Read more: http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/fidel-castro-republican-candidates-display-idiocy-and-ignorance/#ixzz1kaH5D6Zb
Wow and if that can’t be topped….Obama is about as much of a centrist as RWR was….and that is scary…
And a note from John Kerry:
Friend,
Newt Gingrich’s economic plan: Make inner city kids go to work, and, as he boasted Monday night, make sure that Mitt Romney pays no taxes. The middle class can fight over the crumbs.
Contrast that with President Obama’s vision: Invest in American jobs. Strengthen our middle class. Pursue policies that work for everyone, not just the very top.
We know all too well what’s coming. Republicans will attack, assail and lie to destroy President Obama and usher in one-party rule. If the thought of President Gingrich leading a GOP Congress scares you beyond belief, then I’m asking for your urgent help.
*****
We have a choice. We can fight for a nation where fundamental fairness guides us, or we can let Republicans continue Robin Hood in reverse – taking from the many to give to the very few.
I know whose side I’m on, and that’s why I’m supporting the DSCC. Please join me. Let’s win one for fairness.
John Kerry
The Bugman speaks!
“Tom DeLay: Newt Gingrich Was ‘Erratic, Undisciplined’”
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/01/26/412071/tom-delay-newt-gingrich/
It is so much fun to have Gingrich in the race! It makes the Republicans so nervous.
Matt. 7:1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.”
Not speaking of you all as individuals, but the Dems, too, have carried their fair share of corruption, malfeasance and criminal behavior in politics. Boxer, Kennedy, Clinton in recent memory. All “idols” of the Democratic Party.
Oh, for the good old days when you could distinguish one party from the other…
Republicans got their hands caught in the cookie jar, Democrats got their hands caught in the cookie…
Blouise, Romney is pulling ahead in Florida. Rasmussen has him up by eight points this morning. Newt needs a good debate tonight.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72000.html The right drops a bomb on Newt.
Oh dear, oh dear … criticizing Reagan for getting embroiled in a CIA/National Security Council (the NSC is the principal forum used by the President of the United States for considering national security and foreign policy matters … the CIA and NSC were both created in 1947 as part of the National Security Act) plot knowing full well that Reagan’s V.P., George, was a former head of the CIA … and George ended up pardoning all the boys when he formally became the real President and then his son rehired them and … oh dear, oh dear … where’s Ollie when you need him? (North was a National Security Council staff member involved in the clandestine sale of weapons to Iran)
Incestuous relationships between the Republican party and the CIA/NSC just never go away. Poor Newt … he’s taking votes away from the anointed one so all the creeps are crawling out of the woodwork and stepping out from behind the curtains.
Newt is along for the ride. This post is just another example of how virtually every GOP functionary, regardless of stripe, wants the establishment candidate to be nominated. Newt is riding the crest of GOP electorate uglimania ™ and hatred of everything not Jesus-endorsed, at least now that Santorum is on a current downswing.
Really I don’t no what the concern is; in office Newt is likely to be as big a highway robber as Mitt, or bigger since, if anything, Newt is the ultimate loose cannon.
So all this is a big surprise to Newt who probably thought, along with everyone else, that he was doomed last Spring. But the seedier his history is revealed to be, the more it pads his forgiven sinner resume (witness his multiple, really ground breaking adulteries, now being an emblem that he can make cause with the common man).
Anyway, all this increased celebrity status might help him with his present and future Tiffany bills. There is of course the odd chance that he could wind up in the WH, in which case, hold onto your hats. He, along with his cohort aspirees, could be truly dangerous. Not that there’s been an outbreak of common sense among many of the politicos of late.
Fellini wouldn’t have filmed this story, Prof. Even he would have found that it stretched incredulity to the breaking point.
This is the one that’s waiting to be let out of the bottle folks:
Newt Gingrich, Marianne and the Arms Dealer:
A Buried FBI Investigation
By Joseph Trento, on December 13th, 2011
http://www.dcbureau.org/201112136815/national-security-news-service/newt-gingrich-marianne-and-the-arms-dealera-buried-fbi-investigation.html
There is an unstated and moral reason behind the Reagon defenders. He was senile. One does not critcize uncle Ronny when he has lost the marbles. He was an actor, their boy, their Man of Lamantra or Mantra. Keep him on a pedestal for Christ sake or the populace will start thinking about his dumb but not senile predecessors and successors. He was: the success. Oh, we could talk about Ike, Nixon, Jerry Ford, Bushie I, Bushie II. Jeso, keep Ronnie on the Pedestal. Yavull? Dogs know about loyalty, you Republicans, be it old or young but old at heart farts need to shape up.
I love to see this blood letting among these vile scum.Sadly, the more I hear nooty the more I think he is exactly what GOP. Voters want and his shtick can win in Nov.
Now that’s scarey!
Professor, I have studied the Newtster’s physique and my conclusion is there is no eagle talon that will bear the weight. Are there still any dragons around? I figure dragon talons might be strong enough.
I think the 11th and 12th commandments you speak of were part of the Republican “Contract With God” initiated in 1202 B.C.