Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

How Newt Gingrich thinks

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich's comments on President Obama and his worldview are so beyond the pale that the only time the presumed presidential aspirant should ever come close to the Oval Office in the future is either on a tour of the West Wing or as a guest of the next Republican president of the United States.

This is all part of an ongoing campaign to cast Obama as the sinister "other" hellbent on destroying America. Gingrich's remarks fuel the "take our country back" crowd that was here in Washington over the weekend and has been rallying around the country since Obama took office. What sparked Gingrich's nonsense is a conspiratorial, anti-Obama screed from Dinesh D'Souza in Forbes magazine, "How Obama Thinks."

Thankfully, some conservatives are not sitting in silence over this outrage. David Frum takes on Gingrich, D'Souza and Forbes for perpetuating the argument "that Obama is an infiltrating alien, a deceiving foreigner -- and not just any kind of alien, but specifically a Third World alien...." For me, the best part of Frum's excellent rebuttal to Gingrich and D'Souza comes at the end of his piece.

As for the underlying D'Souza article that inspired Gingrich, what is there to be said? When last was there such a brazen outburst of race-baiting in the service of partisan politics at the national level? George Wallace took more care to sound race-neutral.

Here's the question, though, for the rest of us: Why do Forbes (which presumably has many choices of cover material) and Gingrich imagine that such a message will resonate with their conservative audience? Nothing more offends conservatives than liberal accusations of racial animus. Yet here is racial animus, unconcealed and unapologetic, and it is seized by savvy editors and an ambitious politician as just the material to please a conservative audience. That’s an insult to every conservative in America.

Conservatives object to the Obama administration as too expensive, too regulatory, too intrusive, too beholden to Democratic special interest groups, and too apologetic about America's role in the world. It's a libel to claim that we object to the administration as too black or too alien. Bad enough when the libel is issued by liberals. Much worse when it is heard from our own writers, from magazines that speak to us, from political leaders who would speak for us.

When will more conservatives be as insulted as Frum and stand with him to loudly denounce the hate hucksters, xenophobes and birthers on the right? The silence must be broken.

By Jonathan Capehart  | September 13, 2010; 12:00 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama and the right to burn the Koran
Next: Did President Obama psych out John Boehner?

Comments

Gingrich is a narcissistic delusional paranoid! You can't make this stuff up! Oh wait ... he does!

Posted by: thebobbob | September 13, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

If radical right conservatives run true to form, David Frum will now be attacked as a divisive hate-monger for noticing the right wing's divisive hate-mongering.

Posted by: TedFrier | September 13, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

For an article titled "How Newt Gingrich thinks", Capehart says NOTHING about Gingrich. All he gives us is what Frum thinks about D'Souza.

Does this illustrate that Capehart doesn't think for himself?

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | September 13, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich, I have to admit, is a very smart guy. You have to distinguish between what he says and what he thinks. He says whatever he thinks the loony right wants to hear (the more extreme the better)-- usually in the form of simple to remember chants and cartoonish stereotypes about 'elites." I suspect if you were to catch him in an unguarded moment, he might sound very similar to some of the academic elites he loves to criticize.

Posted by: ablum1 | September 13, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich is a boob trying to lead other boobs.

Next Gingrich will start a PAC (political action committee) so that he can take money contributions from the psychos.

I think a lot of people have been trying to get money out of the nut cases, and Gingrich is just another one trying to figure out how to rob the bank.


Posted by: lindalovejones | September 13, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Don't be fooled people: Gingrich says exactly what he believes. He is not "playing" to the fringe; he is and always has been the fringe. Repulsive at best.

Posted by: sellingpencils | September 13, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Don't be fooled people: Gingrich says exactly what he believes. He is not "playing" to the fringe; he is and always has been the fringe. Repulsive at best.

Posted by: sellingpencils | September 13, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

The question is not how Gingrich thinks, it is whether he thinks.

The answer, is "no."

Posted by: Meridian1 | September 13, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

For those wondering what this "brazen outburst of race-baiting" (from a person of color, no less!), here is the key passage: "It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America's military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father's position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America's power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe's resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet."

Now, I may not agree with D'Souza's point of view, and his opinion surely is harsh, but it's far from "race-baiting." This is a great example of how most pundits on the left (Frum and Capehart included) love to categorize criticism as racism.

Posted by: GSS1 | September 13, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich is engaging in the mother of all Hail Mary passes to get to be president because he is deluded, but why isn't anyone pointing out that the guys who signed the, you know, Declaration of Independence, had some pretty "anti-colonial" attitudes?

Posted by: jadada | September 13, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

So, according to Dinesh D'Souza, even though President Obama's father played no role in his life, Obama still learned to see the world through his father's eyes, which eyes apparently (though without any evidence to back it up) saw America as some neocolonial occupier, even though said father, along with his eyes, attended school in America and was a member of an elite political class in Kenya which admired the West. Thanks, Dinesh! Very informative! I will rush right out and buy your book and, of course, vote for that bastion of integrity and honour, Newt "the Chameleon" Gingrich.

On an unrelated note: are all right-wingers retarded?

Posted by: chert | September 13, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter what Gingrich babbles about. He is a total has been. What does matter is that too many people have already given up on Obama... he's a loser. This is what matters this November and in two years. This is what matters in the middle of a world-wide depression. He's a loser.

Obama is for a police state. DHS is advocating iris scanners. Big Brother is watching you.

Obama is for a permanent occupation force in Afghanistan.

Obama wants to empty your pockets to pay for global warming.

Obama wants to escalate the war on drugs.

Posted by: alance | September 13, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Newt who?

Posted by: jckdoors | September 13, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

“How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?”

-Gingrich’s second wife Marianne — whom he cheated on with his current wife, Callista.

Newts response;

“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.“

http://www.esquire.com/print-this/newt-gingrich-0910?page=all

Oh, Newty...

How does it feel to be such a liar, pants constantly on fire...

Posted by: Gates9 | September 13, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

I haven't written about this stuff for a while but it needs to be said. From the viewpoint of many Vietnam Veterans (Me included) Gingrich can say these things because he is, above all a "chicken hawk." Definition...those politicians and commentators who did everything they could to avoid the major conflict of their era, but feel compelled to support and propagandize for all subsequent actions. The second element is that they seek to continue the culture war of that era including with folk who made the same effort to avoid service but hold different political views.
So this just fits, especially the 2nd part of the definition. Obama is just a Black Panther type, even African....oh my God! and the religious junk, great for a former history professor like Newt....pitiful.
And us Vietnam Vets...we just sit and watch, smoke another cigaret...welcome home!

Posted by: mfkpadrefan | September 13, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Yawn.

Jonathan Capeheart is "outraged."

Must be a week day.

(On weekends, he merely gets appalled.)

Gingrich and D'Souza are calling the president an anticolonialist. There is nothing racist about it, except for people like Capeheart who see racism in everything. He's one of those people who gets angry that the pretty clouds are usually white and storm clouds are normally dark.

Get over yourself, Capeheart. No one is buying it anymore. "Wolf" has been cried falsely too many times, and again in this case.

Actually, I'd be willing to wager $100 that Capeheart never even READ D'Souza's article.


Oh, and David Frum will say pretty much anything if it means CNN or MSNBC will invite him on to talk about it.

Posted by: etpietro | September 13, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Seriously Jonathan? I KNOW you're smarter than that. Conservatives will loudly denounce haters and racists when it's NO LONGER TO THEIR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE NOT TO!! When Gingrich-thinking wins you elections and gets the support of the majority of Southern whites, then why would they try to act any other way?

Also, some of the most prejudiced, bigoted people are foreigners (or immigrants and their children), such as Dinesh. First of all, I laugh at a guy who's name sounds WAY MORE foreign than Barack talking about who or what is American. Secondly, Indians (or Indian immigrants) are the last ones you want discussing prejudice. India still has a caste system (I've seen it in effect here in the U.S. among Indian friends). Their disgusting beliefs are cultural and carry over (as I said) here in America. The lowest rung in their caste system are "Untouchables" who happen to be darker-skinned Indians, so it's no wonder Dinesh takes a disliking to the President. This is why those people become Republicans, they fit right in with their hate-filled ideology. However, you never see these immigrants dare move to the South, because they soon realize those whites hate them and their foreign ways more than they hate African-Americans (at least blacks speak like them and eat the same food). Discount anything Dinesh writes Jonathan, he's nothing but a hypocrite.

Posted by: sachancp | September 13, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse


Newt knows how this sort of thing works.

That's why nearly 2 years after he was elected, MORE people doubt President Obama's citizenship and religion. More, not less.

It's because there is no "off" button on the Republican smear machine. Newt just installed a new one over the weekend.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | September 13, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capeheart protests the Mr. Gingrich used a dirty word or something. All Mr, Gingrich did was point out some interesting Obama background.

The African Anti-Colonial worldview was taught in all the colleges Obama attended.
It was part of the Marxist interpretation of history. That teaching spread like wildfire during the 1960s and continues today.

Obama himself has admitted on many occasions that he liked to associate with the marxist professors and students in college. He indicates that was his crowd.

Is it so far fetched to believe he absorbed part of that worldview in school and remains influenced by it in some respects?

If that's not credible, then does education have no influence on students?

The same worldview drives Reverend Wright's theology, which Obama also liked for 20 years, but then gave up several months before the Presidemtial election.

Indonesia, where President Obama spent many years, was a primary center of anti-Western Anti-Colonial movements for many decades.

So, President Obama started with Kenyan family members with anti-Western roots, continued to be exposed to that in Indonesia, then moved to elite marxist college courses and then chose a religion compatible with these views.

Newt Gingrich just has the courage to point out what the Emperor is wearing or not wearing.

People should just look at his policies and judge for themselves how much of that idealogy has stuck to President Obama.

The fact that Obama can't seem to go a week without assailing the richest 2% is interesting. I think he'd have withdrawal symptoms, if he tried to go "cold turkey" for a month.

Posted by: jfv123 | September 13, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

The conservatives always accuse us of "playing the race card"...Well the deck you brought to the table was heavily stacked with race cards.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | September 13, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama is nothing but a clueless professor.

As with most Liberal thinkers Obama believes his sheepskins and classroom lectures reflect action and reality. They do not.

Unless hard science, like mathematics, all classroom activity is an exercise in opinion and belief, not empirical fact.

He and team are over matched.

He does not grasp the limits of his own belief system or the boundaries to which it should be confined.

Therefore he has become incompetent, dangerously so, Literally enabling and appeasing our enemies both with domestic spending and his solicitous efforts with Islamists.

Professor needs to go back to school.

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwp.me%2Fp13j9q-1z&h=4d00f


Posted by: clueless-professor | September 13, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

"Nothing more offends conservatives than liberal accusations of racial animus. Yet here is racial animus, unconcealed and unapologetic, and it is seized by savvy editors and an ambitious politician as just the material to please a conservative audience. That’s an insult to every conservative in America."

Unfortunately, Mr. Frumm is that most rare of endangered species - the principled conservative. The rest of the right wing is just a skunk hair away from become a howling, racist mob, one that has been artfully manipulated by the corporate matrix into believing that Obama The Socialist is the cause of all their problems.

Posted by: kg1957 | September 13, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I read the Forbes article. While the article is quite negative in how it portrays the President I fail to see any type of race baiting. Would like to understand what passages Capeheart or Frum view as "race baiting."

Posted by: eeskin | September 13, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

to Mr Capehart; ALL,

the UNvarnished truth is that Mr Capehart believes that EVERY person, who dislikes DIMocRAT's policies, is a racist. = in his "strange little world" it's all about skin-COLOR & nothing more intellectually sound than that.
(where he sometimes "runs into trouble" is when the person criticizing BHO/the DIMocRAT lunatics, is also NON-white. - like ME for example.)

THEN, he & the other "professional race-BAITERS" stammar, stumble, fumble & then carp/whine/complain/whimper about how BASICALLY UNFAIR it is to point out the vacuity of their arguments, the UTTER SILLINESS of their positions AND to criticize them for that race-baiting.

in this case, it makes NO difference whatever WHAT or HOW Mr Capehart & the DIMocRATS regard Mr Gingrich, as BHO & the DIMocRATS are headed for the biggest political BLOODBATH in modern history in about 7 weeks.
NOTHING that any "progressive"/leftist/liberal can say/do between now & November 2 will forstall the DEATH of the DIMocRATS party as a major politcal force, as their "coalition of diverse groups" is coming apart at the seams. = the election of 11/02/10 won't even be close. FACT.
(the latest "non-partisan polling indicates a NET LOSS of 60+ seats in the HoR, 11 Senators & 8-10 governors.)

after 11/02/10, the remaining DIMocRAT extremists in the Congress can WHINE/CARP/COMPLAIN/WHIMPER all they like BUT hardly anyone will care, as they will be IRRELEVANT to the process. = BHO will also, after Nov 2, be a LAME DUCK, who might as well go on "vacation" until 01-20-2013, for all the good he'll do in the office of POTUS.

yours, TN46
coordinator, CCTPP

Posted by: texasnative46 | September 13, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Just look at the repub comments being posted. You repubs are a true reflection of your political party... dumb and getting dumber.

Posted by: VietVet68 | September 13, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

I didn't care for Gingrich the first time around. He didn't exactly leave the Senate with his head held high. He'd better check the skeletons in his closet before he runs for anything. Or is he just jealous and trying to rain on President Obama's parade?

Posted by: MNUSA | September 13, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

I read the Forbes article. While the article is quite negative in how it portrays the President I fail to see any type of race baiting. Would like to understand what passages Capeheart or Frum view as "race baiting."
==============
Let me show you the race baiting:

When have you ever read an article about any other president's world view in relation to their parentage? Do have the article about Bush Sr. and Bush Jr's father's world view? How about Clinton's just so we are not partisan. Anyone? Anywhere?

It is not enough to remind us often that Obama's father was AFRICAN. Now we must be intimidated because he may have gained his "world view" from that AFRICAN father who by the way he never knew and who never held an elected office?

Do you see the race baiting yet?

Posted by: justonevoice | September 13, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

The reason that Gerard Alexander wrote his desperate little essay yesterday ("Conservatism Isn't Racist...") is because things like this are happening in the GOP and Tea Party every day. Alexander wants to deny it, but the evidence is right in front of us.

Gingrich may be a disingenuous, slimy, hypocritical weasel, but he's not stupid. He knows what really gets the conservative base going. It's not tax-cuts for the rich, it's not so-called "smaller government." It's racial fear and hatred, plain and simple.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | September 13, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich is a failed wimpy crybaby who was pushed out as speaker for being sleazy. "Crooked" is his middle name. How many wives did he cheat on? The first one was dying of cancer while he screwed some staffer on his wife's bed! All of a sudden, and after his third wife....he has found religion! What a wasted human being and people actually look to this guy for guidance......? Sad .......

Posted by: ginger470132 | September 13, 2010 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich makes Joe Wilson seem like a fountain of civility and veracity. Should we let him get his hands on the levers of power? Never again.

Too bad. He's a smart and articulate guy (he is, after all, one of those dreaded academic elitists with--gasp!--a PhD). Even though I thought Newt v.1 (the 1990s version) was a repulsive slug, I was hoping that this incarnation of him would turn out to be a thoughtful conservative (as a centrist, I think we need thoughtful people on BOTH sides of the political divide). Not even close. If Bill Buckley were alive, he'd probably slap Newtie upside da head.

Posted by: post_reader_in_wv | September 13, 2010 9:34 PM | Report abuse

"When will more conservatives be as insulted as Frum and stand with him to loudly denounce the hate hucksters, xenophobes and birthers on the right?"

Uh, when Gingrich et.al. say something conservatives don't agree with. That's when.

Posted by: therev1 | September 13, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse

It is so entertaining to read the thoughts of Liberals and what names they call Newt Gingrich. They use every childish name in the book but have no facts to argue his position. As the Left continues to flail it shows that they have nothing on their side but character assassination with an unloaded gun.

Posted by: bobbo2 | September 13, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan:
Thank you for alerting us to this latest abomination.
Newt Gingrich never got much respect from me, but this pathetic espousal of this poor Indian man who makes his living off the most evil demons in our nature is beneath contempt.
I guess there is no chasm too deep into which the GOP will sink in their desperate attempt to get back into power.
They can influence-peddle and line their pockets with such ease when they wield the reins of power, can't they?
While you hear all about Democratic special interests -- unions, trial lawyers, environmentalists, etc., you never hear about the big oil companies that Cheney courted in Jan., 2001.
You never hear about the banks and the financiers that love the Republicans because they can continue to enjoy the Wall Street casino sans any nasty "regulations", if the GOP returns to power.
You never hear much about the Koch brothers and others who fund the "marches on Washington" and the many so-called "grassroots organizations" that roll in money, their members trucked in as a condition of employment.
No, no, no.
The GOP portray themselves as pure as the driven snow, while their Democratic counterparts are the schemers, the captives of "special interests" who have the unmitigated gall to care about those lazy unemployed workers, too hooked on their foreclosed houses and their poverty-stricken children, living high on the hog on unemployment benefits to care about working for a living, promoting all those "frivolous" lawsuits when people get sick and/or die during the production of, or consumption of, their untested profitable products made in China, Korea, other nations of the Far East, or Mexico and Central America.
The major political tool the GOP employ is character assassination, the more shocking and outrageous, the more to their liking.
It's a sad world, these daze, living in what used to be a good country, isn't it?
Difficult to tell who is who.
No wonder American voters are repelled.
We used to be a united nation who cared about others in need.
But no more.
The new god, the Almighty Dollah, drives these people into the holes they dig for themselves and, unfortunately, for which the rest of us must pay.

Posted by: Judy-in-TX | September 13, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

to all the DIMocRAT apologists here,

WHERE were YOU when "WEE WILLIE KLINTOON" was "getting it on" with a harem of females on the WH staff & on every reasonably horizontal surface in the WH?

DID you post nasty, hate-FILLED, ignorant commentds about "BJ clinton" being UNFAITHFUL, hundreds of times, to his wife while he was POTUS?

also, what (if anything) have you said about BHO's infidelities to Michelle?
(NOTHING, RIGHT?)

OK, i'd guess that it's A-OK with all of you DUMB-bunny DIMocRATS, since those TWO creeps are UNFAITHFUL, DISHONEST DIMocRATS & HYPOCRITES, isn't it?

laughing AT the whole of "the LEFTIST claque". = you are so PREDICTABLY laughable & "two-faced".

yours, TN46
coordinator, CCTPP

Posted by: texasnative46 | September 13, 2010 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich notoriously was at the forefront of those condemning Clinton for his marital indiscretion. Returning from giving a speech on the importance of family values, his wife (at the time) confronted him with the affair that he was having. Asked how he could tolerate the apparent inconsistency of his words and his behavior, she quotes him as saying: “It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”

This may sound stupid and ignorant. But Gingrich is neither of these. However, the evidence makes it clear that he probably has less integrity than any major political figure in the United states today.


http://theweek.com/article/index/205947/newt-gingrich-the-5-juiciest-details-from-his-ex-wife

Posted by: twm1 | September 14, 2010 12:33 AM | Report abuse

So now Democrats are Carnac the Magnificent who can read other peoples mind and then explain it to us. Excuse me, I'll make my own decisions about what Gingrich says and what Obama says as well.
The srrogance is astounding.

Posted by: kalamere | September 14, 2010 1:17 AM | Report abuse

So now Democrats are Carnac the Magnificent who can read other peoples mind and then explain it to us. Excuse me, I'll make my own decisions about what Gingrich says and what Obama says as well.
The srrogance is astounding.

Posted by: kalamere | September 14, 2010 1:18 AM | Report abuse

Waaaaaaa. You disagree with me so you are a racist. It's simply not working anymore. You leftists have played it and played it and played it. It's all played out, folks.

Posted by: lavistabb | September 14, 2010 7:55 AM | Report abuse

The dribble, like this piece, that proports to be journalism coming out of WaPo these days is simply astonishing.

Posted by: lcary | September 14, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

"Beyond the pale"? "PALE"?

I can't bleieve how disgustingly racist this so-called "journalist" is. It's no surprise that the Washington Post, racist organization that it is, pays him.

(Sorry, just channeling my inner liberal here)

Posted by: malclave | September 14, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company