Goodbye Gingrich?
His opponents sound like Occupy Wall Street protesters as the SEC files charges against six top executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who seem not to have profited from Newt Gingrich’s $1.6 million of advice as a historian.
The indictments could be a harpoon to bring down the GOP’s white-haired whale, sharpening attacks on his self-enrichment with court cases rather than vague accusations.
Asked if those ties should disqualify Gingrich as a presidential contender, Rick Perry tells Iowans, “People are sick and tired of being ripped up by congressmen and senators who are in cahoots with Wall Street financiers, and that’s basically what we have here.”
This follows Ron Paul’s debate attack on Newt’s non-lobbying: “They went broke. We had to bail them out. So, indirectly, that was money that he ended up getting.”
When Mitt Romney mildly observed that “people go to serve the people and then they stay there to serve themselves” and suggested that he return the money, Gingrich slid off the hook by retorting that Romney should give back “all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over the years at Bain.”
That kind of slick evasion won’t wash now as the SEC’s chief enforcement officer proclaims in bringing the cases:
“All individuals, regardless of their rank or position, will be held accountable for perpetuating half-truths or misrepresentations about matters materially important to the interest of our country’s investors. Investors were robbed of the opportunity to make informed investment decisions.”
Photo via shutterstock.com
8 Responses to “Goodbye Gingrich?”
Mr. Stein
Once again a jarring and completely unnecessary attack on someone’s physical appearance has diminished the effect of your article.
Your points can be made, and better made, without sexist and physically derogatory comments.
Just sayin’.
Wild assertions about the Supreme Court.
An intention not to enforce the law, should he be sworn in to uphold it.
These and more make us wonder if we should let Gingrich anywhere near the White House.
Indeed, his incendiary comments have succeed only to diminish the singular asset he had for winning the nomination — that as an experienced hand he could whip his party in line and fashion a working majority to run our country.
Instead, Gingrich has spouted off unhelpful, unfounded and divisive comments that restart fires we had put out long ago.
And to think he could have kept his mouth shut and won the nomination, or even the election.
Plato was right. Democracy can be dangerous.
“whitehaired whale” sexist,physically derogatory comments…
I dunno:
“whitehaired” is a condition most of us seniors experience — hopefully nothing derogatory there
“whale” can be male or female, nothing sexist there. Stein may have used “whale” as an analogy to a giant; powerful; influential, etc., in the Republican Party
@ Dorian – When a comment to an article totally ignores the main point and tries to make something out of an inconsequential remark it’s usually because the one making the comment agrees with the authors point but doesn’t like it all the same.
Quite an insightful point, Steve
@ Dorian & Steve K.
The main point was ignored because it was so obvious (and repetitive – Newt’s not fit to serve) there was no need to comment further, as you both apparently agree.
The whale comment could have been refering to a strong previous leader and current leader in the polls, but that would seem incongruous given the title and gist of the article. I took it to be a sneer at Newt’s girth.
Sexist was a tie-in to the same author’s other article which inferred Michelle Bachmann was a Norma Desmond-like crazed over the top actor in the last debate. I thought that was an unfortunate and sexist remark.
Unfortunately, I was raised by parents who thought Thumper’s mother’s philosophy should be followed at all times. It has been a handicap, I’ll admit.
I’ve finally come to the resolution that including in comments critical references to physical attributes (which one cannot help and has nothing to do with actions anyway) or implying some outlandish trait (outside of satire, of course) is for me unacceptable and annoying to find in writers that are otherwise insightful since, to me, it diminishes their effectiveness in making their point.
Here I stand, I can do no other.
@The-Ohioan
Thank you for explaining your comments.
Actually, I was too critical/argumentative myself in my response to your comments. We are good — I hope.
@Dorian
We are good.