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joining the conservative rant against "ObamaCare," calling it "madness" and "indefensible," and calling for it to be repealed and defunded?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
Jim Wooten, the AJC's conservative former editor, writes in his column:
ReplyDelete"Boy, would I be happy to think the Newt Gingrich and not Barack Obama would be president after 2012. I'm done with hope and change. America desperately needs a serious, competent, responsible adult in the White House."
Now I could write that same paragraph as total irony, intended to convey the exact opposite. But I know Wooten means it straight-forwardly and seriously.
Which is what makes Newt so dangerous. Wooten is no fool. He is the former Editor in Chief of the Atlanta Journal. If Newt has him completely fooled, what can we expect of the rest of the right-wing voters who respond to Newt's calculated rhetoric?
"Maturity" is not exactly the adjective that comes to mind when one thinks of the Newt who, reportedly, shut down the government over a pique at Clinton, in whose Air Force One Newt had to ride in the back with reporters instead of sharing his private space with him.
ReplyDeleteThat's a bit of a stretch, but the story fits with what people knew of his IMMATURITY, his mercurial temper, and his rash actions.