Nut #15 - How long does it take for a ship to sink?

Once a huge hole has been blown in the side of a ship, how long does it take for the ship to sink?

A huge hole was blown in the side of Nut's campaign ship 2 weeks ago, when 16 of his key staff members resigned en masse, along with his entire Iowa operation.

Nut "felt relieved," he said, because now he could run the kind of campaign he wants -- which is one of ideas. But it takes people on the ground to arrange the rallies where people will come to hear your ideas -- unless he plans a TV-Twitter campaign.

Since then, Nut remains stuck in the polls in the also-ran category. But energizer bunny just keeps on keeping on.

Now the top two members of his fund-raising team have quit, too. And the campaign is reportedly more than $1,000,000 in debt, chiefly due to Nut and Callista's travel expenses. She has to get home for choir practice, and all that.

Of course, Nut and Callista have enough money from their lucrative book, DVD, and film productions, and from his speaking career to finance it all themselves. Will they? It seems to me that, if they start doing that, they defeat what must surely be the main purpose in Nut's running for prez -- to enhance the income from books, DVDs, and speaking fees. He clearly is not going to win.

Quarterly finance reports are due soon. It's going to be humiliating on top of all the defections (unreplaced as yet) and make him look even more like the loser that he is.

Surely this ship will sink beneath the waves . . . soon.

Ralph

Nut - #12 - All quiet this week

For the week of May 30:

Little has been heard from Nut this week. The only news was that the "bling thing" still had some legs -- you know, the half-million credit line at Tiffany's. While it's perfectly legal, it hurt Nut's image.

Instead of the hard-working, Big Ideas man who can start up a new think tank or foundation before breakfast, we were suddenly reminded of his philandering past. The jewels were apparently for his wife, but that only served to remind us that Callista was the mistress with whom he had a long-running affair while married to wife #2.

On top of that, any ostentatious display of wealth to those without jobs or who lost their homes will hurt your cause. Not that Nut tried to "display" this -- it was picked up in some sleuthing, including Callistat's financial disclosure records for her government job.

Maybe Nut's been out there this week on the ground shaking hands in Iowa and New Hampshire, but he hasn't done much that attracted news coverage -- or else there is a media boycott.

Which is a good thing, I guess. With Nut still languishing in the polls, pulling 6 to 8% and often behind Michael Cain, the only way he can move up from there is to make a big splash. And Nut's splashes usually turn into disasters.

My guess is that the campaign strategy is: stay out of the spotlight for a while and hope people forget. Then come back and try to think before you speak.

Ralph

Nut = #11 - ridicule replaced by ignoring

This is my Nut blog for the week of May 23rd.

The conservative pundits are waving bye-bye to Nut.

The comedians will have one more round with the "bling" thing. You know, the half-a-million dollar charge account balance at Tiffany's. Either Callista must luuuve her some diamonds -- or else Nut is apologizing big time for something.

But the GOP establishment seems already to have cut Nut adrift. With Huckabee and Daniels out of the race, an article in the New York Times (5/23) assesses the field and concludes that "The contest in now increasingly focused on three former governors": Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and to a lesser extent, Jon Huntsman.

And it quotes Fred Malek, a long time Republican fund-raiser and adviser: "I believe the field is now complete and is now strong, with three former governors who have records of cutting costs and balancing budgets."

The article also mentions that some are still hoping for new, better prospects to emerge, the most often cited being Gov. Christie of NJ, Paul Ryan, and Jeb Bush. All have repeatedly said they aren't going to run.

Malek countered, saying that focusing on Mitt, T-Paw, and Jon H will allow their stature to grow. It's been such a circus with the fringes bringing down the perceived quality of the lot, so that no one looks like a serious mature candidate -- except the ones who hadn't yet declared, like Daniels.

Of course there are still the Tea Party darlings, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, who could jump in and liven up the debates and rev up the crowds; but they aren't treated as serious contenders by these party stalwarts, who are determined not to let the Tea Party pick the GOP nominee.

Here's the kicker.

Nowhere in this entire article is the name

Newt Gingrich

even mentioned.

That is the unkindest cut of all for a narcissist like Newt. With ridicule, you can say they're trying to diminish you because you are such a threat to the Washington way of doing things -- or that it's the price of offering yourself for public service, and you're willing to endure it; besides, it only proves how important you are.

But there's just no way to make BEING IGNORED seem anything but devastating. And it looks like Nut is entering that phase -- at least as far as the GOP movers and shakers are concerned. They seem determined not to let Tea Party extremists take over; and the Tea Party is certainly not going to embrace Nut as their choice.

Sorry, Nut. It looks like you're not the one any GOP faction wants. Most everyone agrees you're very smart, and you are a vesuvius of big ideas. But you are too immature and lacking in integrity and discipline -- in short: you are not the adult that is needed for such awesome responsibilities.

Ralph

Nut #10 - Enough

I've had about enough of writing about Nut, and I suspect everyone else has too. So this will be my last post about him -- at least for a while. What I'll do, as long as he's making news, is put up a new Nut post about once a week, and just add comments to that, when I can't help myself.

That way Nut news won't have such a dominant place on ShrinkRap. And I'll turn my attention to other things.

People are still writing about the terrible, awful, not very good week that Nut has had -- all self-inflicted. The more he tried to fix it, the worse it got.

Now the comedians are moving in for the kill -- and campaign cash will slow to a trickle and then stop. That's the way the world ends, Nut -- not with a bang, but a whimper.

Ralph

Newt/Nut - #9 - Bye, bye newtie

Nut had a disastrous first week out as an official candidate. Fighting with his own party, then backtracking and flip-flopping. Then trying to blame his "Meet the Press" debacle on the interviewer and claiming it was a set up interview; and his spokesman going ballistic and saying they were out to get Nut.

It couldn't be much worse -- especially for someone with so much baggage to try to overcome. And then there was the character issue waiting in the background to inevitably do him in.

But who knew it could happen so fast?

Now HuffPost is reporting that big donors are deserting him. For a fund-raiser that was planned with 18 sponsors, 13 of them backed out within 24 hours of his disastrous "Meet the Press" interview.

And that was before Nut made it even worse with his attempt to repair the damage.

Wow -- this is astounding !!!

Ralph

Newt/Nut - #8 - Bad news

The Wall Street Journal headed its editorial with:

"Gingrich to House GOP: Drop Dead."

. . . Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday about Paul Ryan's reform plan, Mr. Gingrich chose to throw his former allies in the GOP House not so much under the bus as off the Grand Canyon rim.

The Ryan program "is too big a jump," he said. . . . "I'm against ObamaCare, which is imposing radical change. And I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.

Criticizing Nut for attacking the Ryan's plan, the WSJ said:

The episode reveals the Georgian's weakness as a candidate, and especially as a potential President—to wit, his odd combination of partisan, divisive rhetoric and poll-driven policy timidity. . . . Mr. Ryan speaks softly but proposes policies commensurate with America's problems. Mr. Gingrich speaks loudly but shrinks from hard choices. Who's the "radical" and who's the real leader?

Nut, your campaign is in big trouble. Let us count the ways: The Club for Growth doesn't like you. You're just 1% ahead of Sarah Palin in the polls. The people have a preponderantly negative view of you. And now the WSJ doesn't like you.

Now just who is it that thinks you're what the country needs?

Ralph

Newt = Nut - #7 - Nut's in trouble within own party

Reported from an Iowa meeting with Repub voters:

IOWAN: What you just did to Paul Ryan is unforgivable.
GINGRICH: I didn't do anything to Paul Ryan.
IOWAN: Yes, you did. You undercut him.... you're an embarrassment to our party.
GINGRICH: I'm sorry you feel that way.
IOWAN: Why don't you get out before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

That's pretty bad, but it's one voter in Iowa.

But here's someone with more influence and clout, the new darling of the GOP, South Carolina governor Nikki Haley. She described Gingrich's criticism of Ryan's plan as "absolutely unfortunate."

"Here you've got Representative Ryan trying to bring common sense to this world of insanity, and Newt absolutely cut him off at the knees. . . . When you have a conservative fighting for real change, the last thing we need is a presidential candidate cutting him off at the knees."

And lamely trying to wiggle out of accusations that he has flip-flopped on a number of issues, Gingrich said:

"The challenges that we face are so big, that no one has the solutions. . . . And we’re going to have to run a campaign where ideas keep evolving."

Watch it, Nut. That's right up there with trying to explain your adultery to the Christian Broadcasting Network:

“There’s no question at times in my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.”

Pathetic. Just admit that you're a jerk. You might be more acceptable as a simple jerk than as a jerk who is also a weasel.

And we're not going to let you forget it, any of it.

Ralph

Newt = Nut - #5 - Refreshing honesty

Well, well, well. Newt/Nut is capable of a sliver of honest self-reflection after all. And was it ever refreshing !!!

Today on "Meet the Press," in a long interview that was typical Gingrich, there was this moment of clarity.

David Gregory: "Would you consider the idea of being vice president?

Newt Gingrich: "David can you think of a single candidate that would have me on the ticket with them?"

Quite true, I'm sure. But what does that tell you, Newt?
That everyone's out of step but you?

Ralph

Newt = Nut - #4 - How his mind works

Here's the story on Newt/Nut.

If I were not a shrink, and therefore not bound by my ethical responsibility not to diagnose people that I have not interviewed professionally, I would say that Newt is a pathological narcissist with sociopathic behavior.

Newt-Nut is a colossal, grandiose/super-needy ego wrapped around a sharp mind that generates ideas faster than anyone can process them, including himself. And he is dangerous because he can be very convincing, especially to people who don't know the facts and assume his confident manner comes from speaking truth.

It does not.

It comes from what Mickey Nardo calls the defining characteristic of the narcissist: they believe their own ideas: "I think it, therefore it is true."

Newt is also what someone has called "a Versuvius of ideas;" and as those change mercurially, then so does his conviction of rightness. Hence the flip-flops that are hard for him to explain. He actually believed x yesterday, but today he believes y. So was he insincere yesterday? Or is his duplicitious today? From his viewpoint, the answer is no; because at any moment he believes it.

Well, yes and no. It's relatively easy to understand how this must work in his mind. But there is also the odor of willful manipulation of the ignorant masses, putting forth ideas that I do not believe he believes, like saying that Obama's policies are more of a danger to America than is al Qaeda.

So, in addition to the gradiose narcissist, there is the sociopath who will just say anything to pander for votes.

As a potential POTUS, we must hold him accountable for his behavior, not just what goes on in his mind. Do we want NEWT/NUT answering the red phone at 3 am?

Ralph

Newt = Nut - #3

Huffington Post's screaming headline was, "Newt's Dirty Little Secret."

No, not the marital infidelities, nor even the fact that, since he married his high school teacher in his late teens, he has never been without a wife or fiancee -- not even for a day. Wife #1 and wife #2 were divorced after he had already proposed to the next one in line.

If I were a shrink, I would be wondering what it is that makes Newt so intolerant of being alone, even for a day, ever since he was in high school. But that's not my job here.

Not to mention the fact that he informed both wives of his intent to divorce them when they were recovering from devastating illness -- #1 in the hospital after cancer surgery, #2 soon after receiving a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. My advice to #3: stay healthy.

No, it's not those dirty secrets.

It's the fact that, running in a GOP primary where "ObamaCare" is about as dirty a word as you can utter, Newt actually has a history -- well publicized, in his own published words, so he can't escape it -- of supporting mandatory health insurance coverage. In the mid-2000s, he and Hillary Clinton together sought to construct a centrist position on health care reform, which included individual mandated insurance purchase.

He wrote in an op-ed for the Des Moines Register in 2007:

"Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it. . . . An "individual mandate" [should apply] when the larger health-care system has been fundamentally changed."

In his 2008 book, Real Change, he wrote:

"Finally, we should insist that everyone above a certain level buy coverage (or, if they are opposed to insurance, post a bond). Meanwhile, we should provide tax credits or subsidize private insurance for the poor."

So . . . how is he going to explain these prior positions and his recent joining the conservative rant against "ObamaCare," calling it "madness" and "indefensible," and calling for it to be repealed and defunded?

It's quite simple. Newt-Nut is now running for president. He's just saying what he thinks will get more votes from the crowd he is pandering to at the moment.

Integrity? He has none. Wife #1 said so, in an interview in Vanity Fair. Consistency? None. Morality? None. Ask him about all the non-profit foundations he has set up to collect money and how much of that money actually goes to charities?

Newt-Nut needs to be in a think tank, where people play with ideas, not in the war room or a cabinet room making decisions that affect other people's lives.

Ralph

Newt = Nut - #2

Rarely has a major newspaper run such a damaging editorial in response to the announcement of a serious candidate for the presidency as the New York Times wrote on Newt Gingrich on May 5th. Add to that Gail Collins' column in today's Times, which brims over with sarcasm and scorn, as well as other pundits -- and you get the impression that Newt/Nut's campaign is in big trouble from the start.

Here's what the Time's editorial board wrote on May 5th:

Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and latest entrant in the Republican presidential field, has money, experience and name recognition. His introductory video is all serenity and hope, a deceptively calm way for many voters to meet a splenetic politician with a long history of slashing divisiveness and intolerance.

He refers to himself as a historian, but apparently his personal study of history has primarily taught him about the effectiveness of demagogy. Donald Trump, fiddling with birth certificates, is an amateur compared with Mr. Gingrich at sliming the Obama administration — as well as Democrats, Muslims, blacks and gay men and lesbians.

The Democrats who won in 2008, including President Obama, are “left-wing radicals” who lead a “secular socialist machine," he wrote in his 2010 book, “To Save America.” He accused them of producing “the greatest political corruption ever seen in modern America.” And then the inevitable historical coup de grâce: “The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.”

The slurs don’t stop there. He compared the Muslims who wanted to open an Islamic center in Lower Manhattan to the German Reich, saying it “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.” He is promoting the fringe idea that “jihadis” are intent on imposing Islamic law on every American village and farm.

Last year, he called for a federal law to stop the (nonexistent) onslaught of Sharia on American jurisprudence and accused the left of refusing to acknowledge its “mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.” This nuanced grasp of world affairs was reinforced when he said that Mr. Obama displayed “Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior.”

In his world, advocates for gay rights are imposing a “gay and secular fascism” using violence and harassment, blacks have little entrepreneurial tradition, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor of the Supreme Court is a "Latina woman racist." (He kind of took back that last slur.)

Despite all this, not to mention the ethics violation when he was speaker, Mr. Gingrich’s real liability among the conservative and fundamentalist groups that dominate the Republican primaries is his personall history of infidelity that led to two sordid divorces. (Much of which took place while he was denouncing President Bill Clinton for moral transgressions.) That may explain his endless calls to restore Judeo-Christian values.

It is sometimes difficult to know what some Republican candidates stand for, as they pander to the far right without alienating the center. It is not difficult to know what Newt Gingrich stands for, and to find it repellent.

I rest my case.

Ralph

Newt becomes "Nut"

This morning, as I was walking on the treadmill at the gym and reading the captions on the bank of muted TV screens, CNN's anchor was discussing Newt's announcement that he's actually running for president.

As usual, the voice-activated, automatic translator of spoken word into written captions made a lot of mistakes -- often using a phonetic spelling for something unrecognized.

I chuckled in deep satisfaction when, not once, but twice the caption read "Nut" instead of "Newt." (see, "ew" is a long "u" sound, so they wrote nut).

Thus, a new thread is born: "Newt = Nut." In which I will chronicle my deep antipathy toward this integrity-less, dangerous man who thinks he should be our next president.

Ralph