Gingrich’s ironic assessment of ’08

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as usual, is disgusted. This time, he’s blasting the field of 2008 presidential candidates who, Gingrich believes, are “demeaning the presidency” by jumping through pointless hoops.

“We have shrunk our political process to this pathetic dance in which people spend an entire year raising money in order to offer non-answers, so they can memorize what their consultants and focus groups said would work,” Gingrich said.

In a speech to the John Locke Foundation, a conservative think tank, the prospective Republican candidate said he will not consider running until he has created a wave of reform. […]

“This idea of demeaning the presidency by reducing it to being a game show contest … is wrong for America, and I would never participate in it,” he said.

In principle, I don’t entirely disagree. The process can be silly at times, and watching 10 candidates offer sound-bite answers — when they’re not raising their hands to yes/no questions — can start to appear a little demeaning.

But for Newt Gingrich to complain about politicians offering “non-answers,” crafted by “consultants and focus groups,” is rich. Good ol’ Newt practically invented this style of politicking; it’s too late for him to complain about it now.

Go back and take a look at this 2004 interview with GOP pollster Frank Luntz. He and Gingrich put the “Contract with America” together thanks to the clever work of “consultants and focus groups,” who determined it would be successful. The whole point was to find rhetoric — not policies, mind you, just words that sounded good — that would propel Republican candidates.

Indeed, as James Joyner noted today, Gingrich circulated a memo called “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control” to incoming GOP freshmen, shortly after the Republican take-over in 1994. Gingrich told his army:

Often we search hard for words to define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.

You can go take a look at the whole list, but the point of the memo isn’t subtle: Gingrich wanted his team to memorize the words GOP consultants and focus groups said would work.

Did it work? Like a charm. As Joyner explained, Gingrich’s style contributed to creating “the current atmosphere of extreme polarization that characterizes the American political landscape.”

And now Gingrich is complaining about it. The irony is rich.

““This idea of demeaning the presidency by reducing it to being a game show contest … is wrong for America, and I would never participate in it,” he said.”

Looks like Newtie’s internals are not looking that good.

  • i’m reminded of an old emo philips joke about the german who complained that you couldn’t get good bagels in berlin. emo asked, “and whose fault is that, i wonder!”

  • Instead of a ‘debate’ let’s pull a surprise on all the turkeys. Give each candidate a blue book or two, escort each to a seperate, sound-proof, guarded booth, and give them an hour to write on whatever they want. Of course, they would have to be scanned for electronic devices first.

    The results would be revealing and sometimes comical. Can you imagine what W would produce in such circumstances?

  • Newt wants to lament politics as a ‘game show’, and somehow be taken seriously? This, from the guy who looked deep into the c-span camera and delivered heartfelt outrage and fiery oratory before an empty house chamber?

    Reagan was an actor turned politician. Newt is the first teevee politician. His entire career is based on what works on the teevee – reality be damned.

    Earth to Newt: Insipid game shows work on teevee. They hurt no one. The realities of your teevee political career have come home to roost, and it’s a disaster.

  • Let us not forget Newt is the one who shut down the entire US government because he was miffed Clinton didn’t let him ride in the front of Air Force One.

  • c. 1992 Newt Gringrich let the Genie out of the bottle. Ever since, the politics of personal destruction have prevailed. Newt now wishes to be above the fray he himself helped to manifest. Newt is a dangerous human being, willing to move the debate to the limits of decency. Newt’s scourge upon our nation, I will be sure to pass on to my grandchildren as a clear example of what catastrophe can come from an unbriddled pursuit of power. Newt Gringrich is the Anti-American! -Kevo

  • All these things are true, but still – “reducing politics to a game show” is a hell of a good encapsulation of what the campaign year has become, for both sides of the aisle. Having it come from the lips of a hypocrite doesn’t make it less resonant.

  • So Newt’s a hypocrite. Surprise! Surprise!

    I am in total agreement with his evaluation. There is no candidate in either race that fills me with positive enthusiasm. A few incite strong negative feelings. Hillary instills as much hatred and division in THEM as GWB does in US. That alone is good grounds to reject her.

    The country needs to be united or we’re in deep doo-doo.

  • “This idea of demeaning the presidency by reducing it to being a game show contest … is wrong for America.”

    Stunning, coming from the mouth of the host of “Bowling for Impeachment,” “The Presidential Dating Game,” and “Wheel of Frivolous Investigations.”

  • I just have to answer my own rhetorical question from #4

    “Can you imagine what W would produce in such circumstances?”

    A stool sample.

  • Nope.
    Can’t go there with ya.

    Gingrich’s Contract On America was a lot more than empty words.
    The list of words were the tool with which he would encourage his class of ’94 to implement the CoA.

    Newt’s crime is in a failure to realize that the empty words tool would become an end to itself. Power to be used for nothing more than retention of power without solid goals like his (disagreeable as they may be.)

    He has become disgusted with the child he birthed though it began with accomplishments he felt proud of. When the method accomplished what he saw as worthy goals, he praised the rhetoric. When it is used in service of corruption, he condemns it.

    It’s not ironic. The method and goal were mutually exclusive and the failure to see the potential for the method’s misuse was, as I see it, understandable.

  • Dr. Frankenstein really thinks his monster should quit killing the townspeople.

    I got an idea… How about you go kill the monster, Dr. Frankenstein?

    What are ya… Chicken?

  • Comments are closed.