Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Joe Conason: New ‘Mature’ Newt Is Just Same Old Gingrich

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-17-11 08:41 AM
Original message
Joe Conason: New ‘Mature’ Newt Is Just Same Old Gingrich
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/new_mature_newt_is_just_same_old_gingrich_20111116/

New ‘Mature’ Newt Is Just Same Old Gingrich

By Joe Conason


snip//

All politicians lie, but Gingrich specializes in this brand of self-puffing fantasy. The actual history of his employment by Freddie Mac, as excavated first by reporters at the Associated Press and more recently at Bloomberg News, is far less flattering to the former speaker than his own dramatic account. According to stories published by both news services since the debate, Freddie Mac hired Gingrich precisely to head off stronger regulation by arguing to Republicans that the mortgage firm had demonstrated the benefits of private-public partnerships.

The executives who dealt with Gingrich remember no brisk lectures from the former history professor about their risky “bubble.” Instead, he attended strategy sessions at Freddie Mac’s Washington offices—and failed to live up to their hope that he would provide useful advice or written materials defending their business. As a congressman from Georgia, he promoted the same lending to low- and moderate-income homeowners that he now denounces so bitterly, and got on the Freddie Mac sugar teat in 1999, within a year after resigning his congressional seat in disgrace. Indeed, today Bloomberg reports that Gingrich stuffed his bulging pockets with as much as $1.8 million in Freddie Mac consulting fees between 1999 and 2007.

Confronted with the Freddie Mac denials this week, a Gingrich spokesman had the gall to cite a “confidentiality clause” in his 2006 contract that prohibits him from discussing his work for them. Evidently that clause only forbids him from telling the truth about the consulting deal, while leaving him free to invent a version that portrays him as prescient and honest.

Gingrich’s conduct may not trouble the pork-choppers in the Republican hierarchy, who punted him as speaker only when he became a political liability after the Bill Clinton impeachment fiasco. But it ought to infuriate the tea party faction, which supposedly despises Washington insiders feeding off the public-private teat, as Gingrich obviously did. He says that every contract he has signed since leaving Congress stipulates that he isn’t a lobbyist—but many more questions might now be asked about the specifics of his “non-lobbying” business as an agent of influence for those who could pay his exorbitant fee.

As Salon.com’s Joan Walsh so wittily put it, even Newt’s baggage has baggage. His crude mistreatment of his first two wives makes Herman Cain look chivalrous; his flip-flopping on climate change and health care makes Mitt Romney look consistent; his anti-Muslim extremism (almost) makes Michele Bachmann sound tolerant; and his record as the first and only speaker ever to be punished by the House Ethics Committee makes Rick Perry appear virtuous.
That momentary lead in primary polls may make Democrats wishful and hopeful, but this sequel to his failed career is more likely to end in farce—just like the original.
Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-17-11 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
1. The "New Gingrich"? Is that something like the "New Nixon"?
As with the Old Newt, the New Newt is defined by the political cheap shot. Case in point, his current strategy of sucking up to his fellow candidates and the audience in order to get a cheap applause line by bashing the debate moderator simply for encouraging candidates to actually debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC